Second Amendment

Hillary On Gun Control: Supreme Court Is WRONG On Second Amendment

It has become abundantly clear that Hillary Clinton cannot be trusted to part with the truth regarding any subject, at any place, for any reason, at any time.  This is because, 1) she prefers to lie than to tell the truth, and 2) she will say anything, do anything, to achieve her ultimate goal, and that is to become the President of the United States of America.

I correct myself, there is one thing that she can be completely depended upon to do should she achieve her goal:  Hillary Clinton will take away your guns.

As with everything, we can just take an accurate look at history to determine the reliability of this one  thing that Hilary Clinton can be depended upon to do as she says.

Hillary Clinton has been against the American people being able to have guns for her entire career, if one wants to call her time in the public eye a career.  Many of the gun policy actions she suggested during this 30 year period were irrelevant, as when she was first lady of Arkansas and held the same non elected office in the White House, no one cared; she was just someone’s wife, no matter how she wanted to be more.


Equally ineffective would be her time as Senator from New York state, as her entire time in that office resulted in her sponsorship/co-sponsorship of four pieces of legislation, none of them having anything to do with guns.  She was, in fact, a most particularly ineffective member of the US Senate, and since most of the members of this ‘world’s greatest deliberative body’ are ineffective, that is saying a lot.

While Hillary has always been a member of the far left, it wasn’t until she entered the global arena that she started expressing particular views about what she started calling “gun safety” policy.  In so doing she has reached the point where she is now out gun-grabbing the most vociferous of the gun control advocates and second amendment haters, and that includes Barack Obama.

Some of the more outrageous ‘gun safety’ plans she will enact, should she be given the power include:

*Reverse gun manufacturer immunity – let them get sued

Mrs. Clinton spent a great deal of time attacking The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which is a 2005 law that “granted gun manufacturers immunity from civil lawsuits when their guns are used in a crime.”  She repeatedly took on her former opponent in the presidential race, Bernie Sanders, for supporting this bill, as she said: “What about the greed and recklessness of the gun manufacturers and dealers in America?”  Her instincts are wrong yet again: legal experts say that this legislation was created largely to protect privacy rights of small gun companies, as most such lawsuits against them were dismissed in courts anyway.


*Arming more people is not an appropriate response to terrorism

I’ll let this howler speak for itself:  Mrs. Clinton was known to have said “Guns, in and of themselves, will not make Americans safer.  We lose 33,000 people a year already to gun violence, arming more people to do what I think is not the appropriate response to terrorism.  The first line of defense against radicalization is in Muslim American communities.”

*Close the Charleston loophole

Hillary Clinton has spoken frequently on the “need to close the legal gap that allwed Charleston gunman Dylann Roof to buy a gun despite a prohibitive drug charge,’ a claim she repeatedly makes despite the fact that it has been proven that Roof’s permission to purchase a firearm resulted from a clerical error in his paperwork, not a practiced policy.  Continuing in the error of her ways, she has been quoted as saying “A good first step is closing the Charleston loophole in our gun laws, which allows a person otherwise prohibited from buying a gun…to buy one if a background check isn’t completed within three business days.  This loophole allowed the alleged Charleston shooter to buy his gun despite his prior arrest record.”


*Restraints on manufacturer liability and online sales

In her continuing tirade against companies that manufacture and sell guns, Mrs. Clinton has indicated what she means to make happen:  “Let’s reverse the immunity.  Let’s put the gun makers on notice that they’re not going to get away with it.”  She goes even further: “I will also repeal legislation that shields gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers and online sellers from liability suits, even in cases of mass shootings.”

*Rein in the idea that anybody can have a gun anywhere, anytime

Mrs. Clinton has not shied away from harsh criticism “of gun culture in America” and has denounced “the idea that anybody can have a gun, anywhere, at any time.”  She has said that “access to guns in the U.S. had grown way out of balance.”  Clearly, as President, she would be the determiner of who in America could have guns or not.

*Advocated for national gun registry

As far back as the year 2000, Hillary Clinton was a “forceful advocate of creating a national gun registry.”  While she has seemingly backed off that a bit, clearly for craven political reasons, there are numerous signs that a national gun registry is in our future if she is given the power to enact it.

*Balance lawful gun ownership and keeping guns from criminals

The line drawn by Hillary Clinton between law abiding citizens and criminals having guns is thinner and thinner the closer she gets to the ultimate political power.  As she said in one of her political presentations: I…believe that most lawful gun owners whom I have spoken with for many years across our country …want to be sure that we keep…guns out of the wrong hands.  And as President, I will work to try to bridge this divide, which I think has been polarizing.”  Dog whistle, anyone?


*Get assault weapons and guns off the street

Obviously having no idea what an assault weapon is didn’t stop Hillary Clinton from speaking out against them anyway:  “Gun violence was driven down in the 1990s…by getting assault weapons off the street.   Now you’ve got …police forces outgunned by the criminals and the gang-bangers and assault weapons are back on the street.  We’ve got to go and do what works again…having policies that will get guns off the street.”  Being able to classify any gun as an assault weapon would multiply the power of an in-charge Hillary Clinton in grabbing any kind of gun she didn’t like, which is pretty much any gun.

*License and register all handgun sales

Mrs. Clinton has on numerous occasions indicated her support for a legislative proposal to license hand guns.  This legislation would require anyone who wants to purchase a gun to obtain a state-issued photo gun license,  As she herself said:  “I stand in support of this common sense legislation to license everyone who wishes to purchase a gun.”  She continued: “I also believe that every new handgun sale or transfer should be registered in a national registry.”


*Prevent unauthorized firearm use

“We need to enforce and strengthen laws against unsafe or illegal guns.  Moreover, we need a renewed commitment to equal justice for all, and we must reject a false choice between justice and safety,” Hillary Clinton stated as part of her manifesto, “A New Agenda for a New Decade.”  I think we all know how and to whom her brand of social “justice” is going to be applied.

*Appoint anti-gun justices to the Supreme Court

She has said she will do that so that “these judges would unwind the historic Heller decision, which affirmed for the first time the right of private citizens to keep and own firearms.  As Mrs. Clinton was quoted as having said: “The Supreme Court is wrong on the second amendment and I am going to make that case every chance I get.”

This just scratches the surface of what Hillary Rodham Clinton would do to the gun-owning public were she to become President.  As clear as she has made her intentions to impose  such “common sense gun safety measures” as described above on law abiding Americans, she cannot be trusted to tell the truth, and thus it is even more clear that when she’s finished, there will be no second amendment and there will be no one in this nation legally owning a gun.  And like Obama, she doesn’t even need any laws to enact such draconian measures, she would just use “the power of the Presidency.”

About the Author:

Susan Smith brings an international perspective to her writing by having lived primarily in western Europe, mainly in Paris, France, and the U.S., primarily in Washington, D.C. She authored a weekly column for Human Events on politics with historical aspects.. She also served as the Staff Director of the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Children, Family, Drugs and Alcoholism, and Special Assistant to the first Ambassador of Afghanistan following the initial fall of the Taliban. Ms. Smith is a graduate of Wheeling Jesuit University and Georgetown University, as well as the Sorbonne Nouvelle in Paris, France, where she obtained her French language certification. Ms. Smith now makes her home in McLean, Va.


To Top