Daily Beast: Hillary Really Is Coming For Your Guns

[Bartholomew Roberts]

“We need to have a registry that really works, with good information about people who are felons, people who have been committed to mental institutions like the man in Virginia Tech who caused so much death and havoc. We need to make sure that that information is in a timely manner, both collected and presented.” - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/ken...-really-coming-your-guns#sthash.BKi1QZjO.dpuf
(Link is not to original Daily Beast story if you are concerned about giving ad views to anti-gun stories)

This article is a good synopsis of Hillary Clinton's policy views and string preference for gun control, including not just bans but elimination of transfers and eventual confiscation of semi-automatic weapons. While I am sure this is not news to many of us who remember her husband's Administration, I thought it a worthwhile reminder for newer gun owners who may not be aware or even old timers who didn't realize that Hillary wants to go far beyond the 1990s gun control signed by Bill Clinton.

 

[Ryanxia]

We need to do something about all these guns, just one more infringement and we'll all finally be safe...

Or as Senator Feinstein put it, 'Mr. & Mrs. America, turn them all in!'

 

[BSA1]

Hillary Clinton vows to be gun-control president


"It happens every day and there is so much evidence that if guns were not so readily available, if we had universal background checks, if we could put some timeout between the person who is upset because he got fired or the domestic abuse or whatever other motivation may be working on someone who does this — that maybe we could prevent this kind of carnage,”


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/26/hillary-clinton-vows-be-gun-control-president/

emphasis added.

 

[bannockburn]

No new revelations here, just the same old Billary Show with slightly different rhetoric but always with the same agenda.

 

[Tirod]

As we are discussing in the thread on testing for mental stability - how are you going to force a non compliant state to report them?

What criteria? How long a timeout? Who decides?

If they are adjudicated to be predisposed to criminal thinking, what do we do about it. House them in detention centers?

Ask Hillary if she plans on building another GTMO in every state to put these dangerous pre-criminals there. What is that going to cost with it's daily overhead added to the tax burdens?

She won't get all that and knows it, she just want's to disarm the public so they can't resist her beneficial rule.

 

[Bigdog57]

A "time out"? Oh yeah, that will surely work!
The POS who murdered the two reporters was PO'd still from having been fired from his network job here in Tallahassee, Fl. more than a year ago.
So, how long a time out do we really need?

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

We need to do something about all these guns, just one more infringement and we'll all finally be safe...

That's just when you are selling it to the public. Once you get that infringement it is always "This is a good first step!" as if the previous thousands of steps taken in that direction never occurred.

 

[AKElroy]

“We need to have a registry that really works, with good information about people who are felons, people who have been committed to mental institutions like the man in Virginia Tech who caused so much death and havoc. We need to make sure that that information is in a timely manner, both collected and presented.” - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/ken...-really-coming-your-guns#sthash.BKi1QZjO.dpuf
(Link is not to original Daily Beast story if you are concerned about giving ad views to anti-gun stories)

This article is a good synopsis of Hillary Clinton's policy views and string preference for gun control, including not just bans but elimination of transfers and eventual confiscation of semi-automatic weapons. While I am sure this is not news to many of us who remember her husband's Administration, I thought it a worthwhile reminder for newer gun owners who may not be aware or even old timers who didn't realize that Hillary wants to go far beyond the 1990s gun control signed by Bill Clinton.

Running this far left is a risky proposition for her as it only gets her 43% of the vote and alienates the rest. BO avoided the gun conversation nearly entirely for his campaigns for this reason, so she is appealing to her far-left base and apparently hoping for a third party candidate to split the opposition.

 

[rbernie]

The old saw remains true - the successful candidate will pander to their ideological base during the primaries, and then pander to the center during the general election. The question then becomes 'what will they do when they take office?'.

In Hillary's case, she is a believer in the anti-RKBA cause and I expect her to pursue that agenda whenever the opportunity arises.

 

[Midwest]

“We need to have a registry that really works,

Canada tried that, too expensive and ineffective. And it is supposed to work here in the U.S.? Uh huh OK

This article is a good synopsis of Hillary Clinton's policy views and string preference for gun control, including not just bans but elimination of transfers and eventual confiscation of semi-automatic weapons.

Feinstein proposed putting certain black rifles under the NFA and eliminate the transfer of them right after Newtown/Sandy Hook. (Plus she was working on legislation for a year earlier) . Her proposal was deemed unworkable and the bill went no where.

Hillary Clinton vows to be gun-control president

She must have a very short memory. I guess she never learned from the massive Democratic defeat in the 1994 elections after her husband signed the AWB into law.

I thought it a worthwhile reminder for newer gun owners who may not be aware or even old timers who didn't realize that Hillary wants to go far beyond the 1990s gun control signed by Bill Clinton.

They did want to go much further beyond than what they did. In fact there was a proposal for Brady II and there was a proposal for an ARSENAL LICENSE as well. In fact you can read the official legislation for it below. Warning: It is scary

But that didn't get any traction as the 1994 Democratic defeat put an end to any talk of Brady II.

http://volokh.com/posts/1190402417.shtml

"Nevertheless, Brady II is worth remembering as a roadmap for the gun control lobby's hopes for "the next step" in federal gun control. Due to the results of the 1994 and subsequent elections, HCI/BC has not been so bold in its declared legislative agenda. "

Arsenal Licensing Anyone?

"Any person who owns 20 or more firearms or more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition or primers (e.g. two "bricks" of rimfire ammo) would be required to get an "arsenal" license. To obtain a federal arsenal license, a person would need to be fingerprinted, obtain permission of local zoning authorities, and pay a $300 tax every three years. Her home would be subjected to unannounced, warrantless inspection by the government up to three times a year. "Arsenal" owners would also have to obtain a $100,000 dollar insurance policy[/B].

"Brady II" redefines "firearm" to include magazines and "any part of the action" (such as pins, springs, or screws). Thus, if a person has two Colt pistols, three Remington rifles, and four magazines (of any size) for each gun, then he own an "arsenal." Or if he owned two guns, six magazines, and a box of disassembled gun parts that contained five springs, five pins, and five screws, then he would own 23 "firearms" and would have to obtain an "arsenal" license."



And then there was hand gun licensing,

"Every handgun buyer would be required to obtain a state handgun license. The license would be good for no more than two years. No-one could obtain a license without passing a state-controlled "safety" course. The fees for the license and the safety course would have no limits. .... Nothing would prevent licensing authorities from taking months or years to issue a license. "


Taxes 30% on handguns, 50% on ammunition.

Magazines more than 6 rounds would be outlawed.

Existing magazines over 6 rounds would go under the NFA and require fingerprinting, LEO sign off.

No more than one handgun a month

Seven day waiting period for all handgun transfers

Want to see the official legislation?
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c103:S.1882.IS:

It was called S.1882 -- Gun Violence Prevention Act of 1994 (Introduced in Senate - IS)


.

 

[GEM]

Funny, how some Democrats are portraying Bernie as a gun nut. If they had the power, the Democratic establishment would ban everything except a Joe Biden shotgun and move for mandatory turn in and confiscations of bad guns. That's stupid from an voting gathering perspective and is just ideological purity - not that the GOP also doesn't have its stupid purity tests.

PS - public opinion guns - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kathleen-weldon/shootings-guns-and-public_b_8065682.html

Seems most aren't Hillary fans.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Hillary's gun control ideas are about as sound as her information control ideas. Weather there was a security breach with her personal server or not ( there probably was) is irrelevant. The real issue is her disdain for protocol, congress and the judicial system, which in effect makes her an elitist and a despot. But we already knew that, or at least I did.

 

[ColoradoShooter77]

We already have an elitist despot in office, why on earth would American want another one?

 

[Midwest]

She is probably screaming for gun control as a hope that the smokescreen would some how over shadow her current legal woes, issues and troubles. Truth is, since her husband was in office many more people are carrying now, especially women. I don't think her anti-gun message will resonate with voters especially women voters. To be a complimentary as I can, Hillary has baggage. A lot of baggage.
.

 

[Partizanai]

Hillary does have her followers...

Hillary's attempts to strip our weapons rights will fail. She will though,
not give in easily on this. The liberal and uneducated will heed her call to
blind faith for their cause.
Most of America's minority's will follow the Dems -no matter what. If one
does not take the time/effort to grasp and retain the facts; they are doomed
to become a part of America's problem.
As I've often said, the Liberal/Socialists fear an armed and unafraid group
of citizens. We are that group, we are America's last true line of defense
against their weakness and failures to lead.
P

 

[Shanghai McCoy]

We already have an elitist despot in office, why on earth would American want another one?

Ummm, because she will get elected by all the people who think it is her turn...?

 

[Walkalong]

Yep, for those not aware, the Clintons are rabidly anti gun.

 

[old lady new shooter]

Ok, so what do we do about this ?

I'd be willing to bet money that nobody here is planning on voting for Hillary. And it makes us feel better to show in black and white exactly what she's saying. But that isn't making sure it doesn't happen.

I just want to comment on two points made so far in this thread:

1. Someone said the minorities will vote for Hillary. I think it's wrong to write off a huge segment of the population like that.
A. Besides the fantastic work being done by Star Parker and her group, a lot more African-Americans are coming out in favor of gun ownership, particularly in Detroit. Oh, and BTW in that View segment the other day it was the BLACK woman who first spoke up in favor of women arming themselves. We need more law-abiding black people to speak up and point out that as the first targets of the non-law-abiding ones they strongly support the right to self-defense.
B. Depending on who the GOP nominates, we might reasonably hope for a greater percentage of the Hispanic vote than Romney got. And IAC there is definitely a segment of that community that supports RKBA -- it's certainly the case around here where I live, in fact at the range the other day I was one of only two non-Hispanics present, including the entire staff. (The other one was an Asian guy.)

2. Someone else mentioned Hillary hanging in and hoping for a third-party candidate to split her opposition. If Trump retains his current position in the polls he will be the GOP nominee and I don't see any of the Republicans running a third-party race against him. But he (Trump) did refuse to pledge he wouldn't run as an independent if he doesn't get the nomination. Being that my mind works nothing like his I have no idea if he was serious or if that was a negotiating technique (along the lines of don't give up something you have that the other side wants unless you get something bigger in return), but that scenario is possible and would be a disaster, and right now I have zero idea what to do about it.

 

[cdk8]

Unfortunately, there is a very high probability that Hillary Clinton will be the next POTUS. If republicans are unable to settle their differences and stop demanding 100% conformity to a dominant ideology, she will walk into the White House with a landslide victory.

Consider this...if she is willing to be this open about her gun control agenda BEFORE she has been elected, consider how anti-gun she is going to be once she is solidified in office for a 4 year minimum.

I would not be surprised at all if she created a commission of some sort with a name along the lines of "preventing gun violence," but with the primary intent of nothing other than strict gun control for law-abiding citizens, and I would not be surprised if she put quite a few of the big anti-gunners on this commission/panel. Maybe have the Brady's head this all up and Michael Moore as the chairman?

 

[Teachu2]

I would not be surprised at all if she created a commission of some sort with a name along the lines of "preventing gun violence," but with the primary intent of nothing other than strict gun control for law-abiding citizens, and I would not be surprised if she put quite a few of the big anti-gunners on this commission/panel. Maybe have the Brady's head this all up and Michael Moore as the chairman?

No, it'll be "Safer Streets for America's Children", headed by Bloomberg. Moore will direct and produce the PSAs. And it's about Total Control, which starts with gun control.

 

[TruthTellers]

Unless Bernie Sanders goes jogging in Fort Marcy Park, Hilary is dead meat in the nomination. The Clintons don't have a closet full of skeltons, they have a graveyard full of them. So, unless Bernie chokes on his toothbrush and croaks, Hilary is not winning.

Not that Bernie is much better than Hilary in his gun politics, but we know the Clintons track record with guns and it's probably worse than Obama's. Obama doesn't have the passion to deal with guns, it's too difficult for him to fundamentally change and if it requires any effort Lazy Barry isn't interested it.

The focus on limiting gun control is at the state level. Big cities and the states, especially in the Northeast and West coast, are filled with die hard anti gun legislators that want to take away 2A. LA just passed a ban on mags over 10 rounds, now that probably won't stand up in California court, but until it's struck down that's the law.

So, the focus needs to be on states because the NRA is a powerful lobby and has a good grasp on Capitol Hill and right now, we are winning on the national level. Now we need to rally in states like NY, NJ, MA, CA, CT, HI, and IL.

 

[Midwest]

The focus on limiting gun control is at the state level. Big cities and the states, especially in the Northeast and West coast, are filled with die hard anti gun legislators that want to take away 2A. LA just passed a ban on mags over 10 rounds, now that probably won't stand up in California court, but until it's struck down that's the law.

So, the focus needs to be on states because the NRA is a powerful lobby and has a good grasp on Capitol Hill and right now, we are winning on the national level. Now we need to rally in states like NY, NJ, MA, CA, CT, HI, and IL.

The anti's are focusing on the states. We lost Colorado, Washington State and Oregon to UBC and we must prevent that from happening again in other states as well.

Already "the next step" on the anti's agenda is the tax on guns and ammo in Seattle. And all this is happening without Hillary in office. They are doing this on a state by state level.

While I agree we must rally in the East Coast states, we also need to fight against Universal Background Checks in the rest of the so called free states.
.
.

 

[RonSC]

Democrats have a short memory when it comes to gun control issues. Al Gore lost his home state (Tennessee) in his bid for POTUS largely due to his anti-gun stance. For Swillary to jump on this same bandwagon so early in the game shows just how desperate she really is!

 

[CoalTrain49]

TT, perfect assessment.

My wife is a liberal. She has other redeeming qualities or I wouldn't have married her, but she's a liberal. I always bounce things off of her to see what a true liberal would say. She supported Obama.

She will not vote for Hillary. She likes Bernie. I don't know anything about him but if she likes him I'm going to bet that Hilary's days are numbered.

Gun control will be activated or deactivated state by state. The do nothing congress won't entertain it and Hilary won't be the next president. She has already hit the wall or will very soon.

 

[cdk8]

No, it'll be "Safer Streets for America's Children", headed by Bloomberg. Moore will direct and produce the PSAs. And it's about Total Control, which starts with gun control.

That's true. Gun control is always "about the children." Never mind the fact that the gun free zones used with schools/daycares/etc. makes an open season for spree shooters, who likely target these areas over others because they won't be met with armed resistance before they can kill numerous innocent people. Nonetheless it's still about the children. It's all about the children. And guns threaten every child in the world more so than everything else combined.

We need swift action and zero tolerance for the sake of the children. Administrators should be more progressive like this guy...

It's common sense!