Posted on 10/25/2016 1:53:27 AM PDT by Innovative
Smokescreen language. Anytime someone puts it in terms of "...safety..." or "...common sense gun laws..." etc. it is complete and utter BS. Study after study shows that private gun ownership improves safety, while places with the most restrictive "gun control" laws are the least safe. The so-called common sense laws are mere stepping stones to complete bans and confiscation.
Look, even the dullest politicians, the most ardent socialists, the most committed fascists out there - like Clinton or bammy - know that to attempt to ban private firearms ownership or confiscate firearms in a single step would ignite a second civil war. The resulting insurgency against the fascists, in our varied terrain, with the number of private firearms, and the amount of information available would make Iraq look like a Church picnic.
So they know they cannot ban private firearms - yet. But they can chip away with ineffective "gun control" laws. "All we need to do is restrict A and we'll be safer..." All the while knowing this idiocy is completely ineffective. Then "There's still too much violence, we need to ban A..." Well duh, you're disarming the law-abiding while criminals get an ever more helpless potential victim pool... "Still too much violence, we need to restrict B...ban B...restrict C...ban C..." Where if you look around the Country and the world you see A, B, C, etc. can be any combination of things like magazine capacity, handguns, semi-automatics, "assault weapons," pistol grips, removable magazines, "universal" background checks... Just chip chip chipping away... All part of the plan.
...as she reassures law-abiding Americans their firearms won’t be targeted under her would-be administration...
Of course not. But once they pass a law or implement an executive order, people owning those firearms are no-longer "law-abiding" they are now in criminal violation - and targeted.
While many Democrats long have been labeled as anti-gun, firearms advocates say Mrs. Clinton’s position is especially disingenuous.
"Especially disingenuous..." Oh, that's the funniest thing I've read all day! (yeah, it's early) Clinton is provably a lying POS that can't be trusted with pocket change.
“...agreement to warrantless spot home inspections regarding proper storage...”
As it is in U.K. But we don’t have parliamentary dictatorship like the Brits & Ozzies do, and passing such a law even with a Democrat majority in the U.S. would be extremely difficult. Passing a national gun registration law would be even more unfeasible.
Hillary thinks she will be the Omnipotent Preezy, but she won’t. She should ask Obama how eight years of ruling with his pen & phone have worked out. In the case of gun control, not at all, zero, zip, nada.
Any bets on how many days in office before she orders the BATFE to institute universal confiscation...?
i do not like the term gun right, which is being transformed into a pejorative by liberals and separated from other human rights. It should be a civil right, as in “armed defense civil right.”
How many days in that regard, how soon will the 2nd American revolution we be close to?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.