The New York Times polled its readers to pick three questions to ask Trump and Hillary.  These were the questions they asked:

  1. It is widely accepted scientific fact that climate change is real and potentially catastrophic. What specific action will you take in the next four years?
  2. What would you do to reduce the extreme income inequality in this country?
  3. What would your administration do to reduce gun violence and mass shootings?

Each candidate’s campaign responded.  The Clinton Campaign’s response on guns was horrifying.

So here’s what I think we need to do. First, we need to expand background checks to include more gun sales, like those at gun shows and over the Internet. There’s no reason a domestic abuser should be able to go online and buy a gun with no questions asked. And we need to close other loopholes, like the so-called “Charleston Loophole” that allows dangerous people to buy guns without a background check if that check isn’t completed within three days.

Second, we need to hold the gun industry accountable, and end laws that shield them from liability when they break the law. We saw that just this month, when one of those laws was used to block the families of the Sandy Hook shooting from having their day in court.

Finally, we need to keep military-style weapons off our streets. They are a danger to law enforcement and to our communities.

By taking these common sense steps, we can keep our children safe and respect the Second Amendment. The vast majority of Americans support measures like these. So our challenge isn’t finding common ground. It’s getting politicians to listen to their constituents rather than the gun lobby.

 I know these are not Hillary’s words, herself, BUT they are directly from her official campaign.  The points laid out here, if passed, would be the greatest assault on the Second Amendment since, and including, the passage of the Brady Bill.

She wants to end the “Charleston Loophole” which doesn’t exist.  The reason Dylan Roof passed the NICS check had everything to do with an FBI error and not an default proceed.

She wants to repeal The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which prevents anti gun activists from suing gun companies out of existence.  Remember, a judge upheld the PLCAA and just dismissed the case against Remington, because Remington bought Bushmaster which made the rifle that Adam Lanza stole from his mother after murdering her to shoot up Sandy Hook.  According to Hillary’s campaign, Sandy Hook was Remington’s fault because of how they advertised their product.

Lastly, she is calling for a new AWB, which didn’t do anything to reduce crime last time.

Hillary Clinton can say that she’s “not here to take away your guns,” but like every other lie that comes out of that lying liar’s lying lie hole, that’s a lie.

Give her campaign a couple of sentences of accidental honesty in a newspaper they don’t think Republicans will read and we find out the truth.

She is here to take away your guns.

Spread the love

By J. Kb

7 thoughts on “HRC NYT and Guns”
  1. Of course those were the three questions their “readers” picked. Because, we all know that Globull Warming, err, Climate Change is the hugest biggest most worst-est thing ever! It’s a bigger concern than ISIS, ask the President!!! He’ll tell you!

    And income inequality isn’t just a Democrat talking point, it’s a fact of life. No, seriously, look at the State dept (run by Hillary, and still today) or the White House and ask why it is that women are paid less (77 cents on the dollar) than their equivalent male counterparts. If income inequality is such a problem, why aren’t they fixing it in the one place they have actual control to fix it, instead of telling businesses by legislative fiat how and why they should have to do it? And they don’t limit their disdain to only women. They only see one way to “help” the poor when the “rich keep getting richer” and that’s to “make them pay their fair share.” It’s the usual class warfare divisive strategy they have been using for decades.

    And of course, guns. Because, guns.

    Nope, no one wants to know what we’re going to do to stop the next terror-attack-that-wasn’t-a-terror-attack.
    No one wants to know what we’re going to do to get the 7-years-of-stupid stagnant-economy running again.
    No one wants to know anything in regards to foreign relations, ISIS, dealing with an increasingly hostile Russia, China, North Korea, immigration, oil pipelines, federal overreach, apparent corruption, voter fraud scandals, human rights violations, constitutional violations, inner city violence, race relations, taxes or anything else.

    Nope.

    Weather, equal pay, and guns— in that order.

    Gee, it’s almost like those were hand picked by editors at the newspaper for an easy set of HRC campaign talking points….

    1. Naturally, all the things you picked are what Trump has been talking about. I think there may be a tie between that and how well he’s been resonating with the American public this election.

  2. 1. Earth is a climate changing environment. If you don’t like or can’t find a climate upon it that suits you or you don’t like any of it, get off this rock.
    2. Get a job. Do the best darn job you can do. Create something that everyone wants and sell it. Create a service everyone needs. Work. create build. do.
    3. Stop controlling others. The second amendment is the answer to this question.

    Now, let’s get to discussing what the actual job of being president is supposed to be……

  3. “…and end laws that shield them from liability when they break the law”

    What law shields gun manufacturers, well any manufacturer, from liability when they break the law?

    The PLCAA does not shield the manufacturers when they break the law. If Remington violated the law when selling the gun used in a mass shooting, they would not be shielded in any way. But, they did not. All their actions were legal.

    1. You beat me to it. Remington was found to be acting 100% in compliance with the law and so the lawsuit was dismissed. Hillary’s campaign is saying — explicitly, the way it’s worded, not implicitly — that Remington violated the law with their business practices but was saved by PLCAA.

      That’s gotta open Hillary’s campaign up to a libel/slander lawsuit, doesn’t it? Continuing to claim publicly that Remington broke the law, after the finding of facts shows they didn’t?

  4. The choice and tone of the three questions demonstrate that the NYT cherry-picked three useless and/or discredited liberal topics to steer the debate.

    1) AGW is a myth. A silly little lie concocted to extort and control the masses.
    2) Income inequality can only be “fixed” by full on communism. Our Constitution guarantees equality of opportunity, not equality of outcomes. Seriously, I’ve worked hard all my life and sought education for my contributions so my job will pay better than a Starbucks barista.
    3) The only “problem” with gun control is that it even exists and it is blatantly unConstitutional. Every single gun control law is null and void per the Constitution. All the states signed on to the Constitution and it forbids governmental control over our weapons. So every such law is an affront to our civil rights. Pragmatically, gun control laws do not stop crime and mass murders, since such laws are flouted or avoided by criminals, so STOP proposing such idiocy!

Comments are closed.