[Richard Poe]

Please let me know if you want ON or OFF of my Hillary ping list.

[AmericanMade1776]

Hillary doesn’t need guns, she has a face that kills.

[Quix]

Which, imho, being interpreted means . . .

SHRILLERY MACHIAVELLI GLOBALIST KLINTOON

hates guns in anyone’s hands that she doesn’t have 100% control over.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Richard.

[2nd amendment mama]

Bookmark for later

[NotJustAnotherPrettyFace]

The first and foremost reason why we have a 2nd Amendment is so that the people can arm themselves against a TYRANNICAL government. The Hillarys of the world want the sheeple to forget that little fact, because it will be the Marxist tyrants like her that will want to take advantage of a defenseless population.

[Joe Brower]

A-yep, Hillary is poison. Nothing we didn't know already... !

Mr. Poe, I bought your book, "The Seven Myths of Gun Control". Great work, that!

[looscnnn]

Some activists, like those of the Black Panther Party, went beyond mere words. In their ten-point platform of October 1966, the Panthers declared, among other things, “The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States gives a right to bear arms. We therefore believe that all black people should arm themselves for self-defense.”

On May 2, 1967, Panther boss Bobby Seale led some 20 armed Panthers into the California State Capitol Building in Sacramento, brandishing loaded rifles, shotguns and pistols. They were protesting the Mulford Act, a pending bill that would bar Californians from carrying guns in public or in vehicles.

Even they could understand what the Constitution says. Amazing that groups like the Black Panthers and the ACLU can get things right occasionally.

[looscnnn]

As long as the right has more guns, the left should oppose guns, Alinsky concluded. Only when the balance of power shifts, and “appropriate weapons” became “available” to the left, should leftists consider turning to violence.

To what extent Senator Clinton adopted Alinsky's thinking on revolutionary violence we can only guess. However, her policy on guns is clear, whatever her motives may be. She seeks to disarm the American people, while arming herself to the hilt.

Another thought, that the leaders on the left are making a mistake by supporting gun control. It also disarms those on the left that would support/help their revolution. It also puts the mentality of guns are bad into the left's supporters which would basically keep them from using them when the time of the revolution came (or should I say if it did). I understand that she wants the government to have the power, which limits them to a revolution at the ballot box and I don't think that will ever happen. However, if the leftist leaders had not said that guns were bad more of their supporters would most likely own them and would be less likely to have an adversion to them.

[Squantos]

Great read as usual..........thanks !!

[Tijeras_Slim]

Good article, and your Myths of Gun Control is a great read as well.

[TexasRepublic]

Bolsheviks rightly fear lead poisoning.

[45Auto]

Leon Trotsky wrote a whole essay in the 1920’s on how the Russian Revolution was armed and the value of firepower in the success of the revolution; there used to be a link to this article on the web. Its no surprise that Hillary, being a good communist, would understand that tyranny cannot be instituted fully while the population at large is well-armed.