I saw your interview with Seth Meyers, where you talked about gun control.  In it, you discussed the need for “common sense gun control” and to close several “loopholes.”  At first, it was obvious to me that you really don’t know what you are talking about.

  1. The gun show loophole.  You mean the ability for individuals to sell a limited number of personal firearms in a year in face-to-face transfers?  Because FFL dealers must have buyers fill out Form 4473’s and perform NICS checks at guns shows.  Gun Shows are not gun law free bazaars.
  2. The online loophole.  You mean were anybody can sell a gun online… and then have to ship it to an FFL to do a Form 4473 and NICS check on the buyer.  Of course an online seller can to an in-state face-to-face transfer in a state where it is legal, but most don’t.  This used to be called the “classified ad loophole” back when people still read newspapers.
  3. The Charleston loophole.  Where if a NICS check doesn’t come back  with a “deny” in three days, the sale can proceed.  That one is necessary to keep politicians (like you, potentially) from enacting a gun ban, by just holding off all NICS checks indefinitely.
  4. Universal background checks.  The idea that the guy who is fencing stolen guns to criminals can be persuaded to perform background checks on them.  Or the idea there is no such thing as Straw Purchases.  Really, universal background checks are just a potential annoyance for the law abiding shooter whose shooting buddy want to make him a better offer than the local gun store on a trade in.

Had you stopped there, I would have just let your interview go, recognizing the usual Liberal Democrat, know-nothing, anti-gun, bullshit talking points.

But you had to go one further and “repeal the immunity from all liability that gun makers and gun sellers have.”  You called for the repeal of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.  First of all, Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act doesn’t provide complete immunity against liability.  It protects gun makers from being sued when criminals commit crimes with guns if the guns were sold by the company legally to law abiding distributors.

On a side note: When CNN calls you out for being wrong, you know you fucked up.

I, like most of the gun community, knows what you are trying to pull.  Gun control is not a winning position to take in America.  Your husband learned that in 1994 after getting the Brady Bill passed.  The Republicans took 54 seats in the House and 8 in the Senate which was due heavily to campaigning by the NRA.

So you want to go after the gun companies with lawfare.   Again, this was something your husband tried, and was somewhat victorious with.  He got Smith and Wesson to acquiesce on backing gun control by agreeing to settle on some lawsuits.  The CSGV went after the ammo retailer Lucky Gunner after Sandy Hook, and got their asses handed to them with a dismissal and $203,000 in legal fees.  The CSGV made it clear that wanted to put Lucky Gunner out of business.

It’s clear you want to pave the way for individuals, probably with the backing of the DOJ, to sue gun makers out of existence.  If you can’t ban guns, shut down the gun makers.

Logically, your position makes no sense.  If a drunk driver runs over a little kid, the parents can’t sue Ford for making the car.  Even Bernie Sanders has enough decency and common sense to understand that “If somebody has a gun and it falls into the hands of a murderer and the murderer kills somebody with a gun, do you hold the gun manufacturer responsible? Not any more than you would hold a hammer company responsible if somebody beats somebody over the head with a hammer.”

The thing is, you are hitting just a little too close to home for me.  I am part of the firearms industry.  You are taking about taking away my livelihood.  I have a wife, a baby, a couple of dogs, a car payment, a mortgage, and student loans.  I go to work, to a job I love.  I work with wonderful people who also love their jobs. We sell guns for people just like us: hunters, sportsmen, target shooters, people who want to ability to defend themselves.  We are a strong part of the local economy.  We are the middle class that you claim to want to help.

You are not just threatening my guns, you are threatening my home, my career, my ability to put food on my table.

I can only hope the other people, working in other industries understand what you are.  How easy it is for you to want to put tens of thousands of people out of work, and cost the economy millions and billions of dollars because you don’t like the products we sell.  This isn’t about saving lives.  This isn’t about preventing the next terrorist attack or mass shooting.  This is about hurting your enemies.

This I will not abide.

From the bottom of my heart, and with the deepest sincerity, FUCK YOU!

J.Kb. (Registered Voter)

 

Spread the love

By J. Kb

5 thoughts on “Dear Mrs. Clinton”
    1. Very Accurate statement. However if we don’t respond, calling out their lies and omissions, as well as providing truth and, the rest of the story, we are remiss in an obligation to provide the otherwise uninformed masses just what reallity consists of.

      1. As the ILOH says, this is often a spectator sport- you’re doing it for the ignorant, not the willfully blind.

  1. “I can only hope the other people, working in other industries understand what you are. How easy it is for you to want to put tens of thousands of people out of work, and cost the economy millions and billions of dollars because you don’t like the products we sell. This isn’t about saving lives.”

    If you work in the Pharmaceutical, Medical Device, Insurance, Finance, Shale Oil, Nuclear, Coal, or any small business; you are on the same list. It may take her a while, it may take her successor. But you are on the list and your job and your industry will be repurposed “for the good of society.”

  2. I wish I could sign my name to this brilliant letter and let her know I feel the same way.

    Of course, I feel that the only way this country can demonstrate its integrity is if she is indicted, and convicted and put in prison for the remainder of her pathetic life as opposed to her coronation.

Comments are closed.

Login or register to comment.