A whole host of really, really bad ideas.
"gun safety measures" - please point to any documented cases where so-called "gun control laws" have actually reduced crime. I'll save you (any lib lurkers out there) some time, don't bother looking, there aren't any. Nada, zip, zero. Gun control laws merely disarm the law abiding and embolden criminals. They *always* result in increases in crime rates. This is obvious without even having to try it, but numerous places have tried it and learned the hard way.
"ban on the assault weapons" - we tried that, for 10 years from 1994 to 2004 (thanks to another Clinton). Guess what, by actual test (as in, we tried it) it made no statistically attributable difference in crime rates. None. Again, this is obvious. So-called "assault weapons" are used in a shockingly low percentage of crimes. Sure, a few isolated cases get massive coverage. But overall, you are quite literally far, far more likely to be bludgeoned to death by a hammer, club, or similar blunt instrument than you are to be shot by an "assault weapon." The odds are so far down there it literally is not worth talking about... Unless your agenda is complete disarmament of civilians, then it is a stepping stone.
"closing background-check loopholes" - ah yes, that old chestnut. The "gun show loophole" by chance? Doesn't exist. SMH. All the so-called "universal background check" laws and proposals are fundamentally, irreparably flawed: they assume criminals will obey these laws while demonstrably being willing to break dozens of others. The idiocy behind such thinking is breathtaking.
"the gun industry’s outrageous protection from civil damage suits" - is in fact no different than the protections afforded many other industries. Why not punish the maker of the car the criminal drives to commit the crime? The maker of his shoes he wore while running making his escape? The fast food place he ate at that gave him the energy to commit the crime... The list goes on and on. Here's an idea, how about placing the blame for the crime squarely on the criminal that commits it?
"denying guns to risky suspects on the government’s no-fly lists" - ah but then that pesky thing called the Bill of Rights gets in the way. Can't easily take away someone's Constitutionally protected rights without due process. Sorry, but the shady and provably suspect no-fly list falls far short of any legal standard for such action.
Hillary Clinton is a power-mad big government socialist/fascist that wants everyone but people under her control to be disarmed. She is exactly the kind of person the Founding Fathers had in mind when they penned the protections in the Bill of Rights.
NYT liberal morons apparently can’t connect the dots.
Hillary is losing in part because of her anti-2nd Amendment position.
It sucks in states like NV, CO, WI, MI, PA and FL where guns are a big part of the culture.
But they still push gun control. Good luck with it.
Well stated!