Post by Origanalist on Jul 2, 2014 19:15:41 GMT -8
At a town hall event with CNN on June 17, Hillary Clinton attacked opponents of stricter gun control. She stated, “We cannot let a minority of people, and that’s what it is, it is a minority of people, hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people.” [Emphasis added.] She distorted her opponents as terrorists.
She was also wrong about opponents being in the minority. A Gallup poll from early October, 2013 found that 49% of Americans wanted “laws covering the sale of firearms to be more strict”; 13% favored less strict laws; 37% wanted them kept the same; and, 1% had no opinion. Otherwise stated, 49% were for and 50% were against increased gun control.
Perhaps Hillary is hoping for a good crisis to swing public opinion her way. In 2009, at the European Parliament in Brussels, she paraphrased a statement first uttered by Obama's former White House chief, Rahm Emanuel. She said, “Never waste a good crisis,” and explained that the economic crisis should be used but used to achieve “very positive” political goals on climate change. Similarly, tragedies such as the school shooting at Sandy Hook (Dec. 2012) should not be “wasted” but be used to push the further nationalization of gun ownership.
In fact, Hillary's anti-gun tirade at the town hall was prompted by a question from a Maryland teacher. The questioner asked if "reinstating the ban on assault weapons and banning high capacity magazines would do any good" to halt school shootings? Hillary's answer dove right into not wasting Sandy Hook. She said, “I was disappointed that the Congress did not pass universal background checks after the horrors of the shootings at Sandy Hook...”
Of course, the controls suggested are “for the children” and ones to which only the terrorist minority could object.
The Myth of Benign Regulation
Regulation of gun ownership is confiscation by another name. It victimizes people who do not even own guns because what is being confiscated is their right to do so. There nothing benign, nothing protective about taking away an individual's right of self-defense.
But overt confiscation of weapons is unlikely to occur...at least, not immediately, because it is not politically expedient. Gun control advocates have learned lessons from episodes such as Connecticut's recent weapon revolt. In the wake of Sandy Hook, the state banned ammunition magazines of more than 10 rounds. Residents who had purchased such magazines prior to the law's enforcement were required to register them with the police by January 1, 2014. Assault rifles manufactured after 1994 also required registration.
continued at...http://dollarvigilante.com/node/6424
She was also wrong about opponents being in the minority. A Gallup poll from early October, 2013 found that 49% of Americans wanted “laws covering the sale of firearms to be more strict”; 13% favored less strict laws; 37% wanted them kept the same; and, 1% had no opinion. Otherwise stated, 49% were for and 50% were against increased gun control.
Perhaps Hillary is hoping for a good crisis to swing public opinion her way. In 2009, at the European Parliament in Brussels, she paraphrased a statement first uttered by Obama's former White House chief, Rahm Emanuel. She said, “Never waste a good crisis,” and explained that the economic crisis should be used but used to achieve “very positive” political goals on climate change. Similarly, tragedies such as the school shooting at Sandy Hook (Dec. 2012) should not be “wasted” but be used to push the further nationalization of gun ownership.
In fact, Hillary's anti-gun tirade at the town hall was prompted by a question from a Maryland teacher. The questioner asked if "reinstating the ban on assault weapons and banning high capacity magazines would do any good" to halt school shootings? Hillary's answer dove right into not wasting Sandy Hook. She said, “I was disappointed that the Congress did not pass universal background checks after the horrors of the shootings at Sandy Hook...”
Of course, the controls suggested are “for the children” and ones to which only the terrorist minority could object.
The Myth of Benign Regulation
Regulation of gun ownership is confiscation by another name. It victimizes people who do not even own guns because what is being confiscated is their right to do so. There nothing benign, nothing protective about taking away an individual's right of self-defense.
But overt confiscation of weapons is unlikely to occur...at least, not immediately, because it is not politically expedient. Gun control advocates have learned lessons from episodes such as Connecticut's recent weapon revolt. In the wake of Sandy Hook, the state banned ammunition magazines of more than 10 rounds. Residents who had purchased such magazines prior to the law's enforcement were required to register them with the police by January 1, 2014. Assault rifles manufactured after 1994 also required registration.
continued at...http://dollarvigilante.com/node/6424