Posted on 10/05/2016 7:44:16 AM PDT by TigerClaws
Hillary Clinton slammed the Supreme Court as “wrong on the Second Amendment” and called for reinstating the assault weapons ban during a small private fundraiser in New York last week, according to audio of her remarks obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.
While Clinton has previously supported an assault weapons ban, this is the first time since launching her campaign that she indicated that she would take on the Supreme Court over gun issues.
Although Clinton did not identify which Supreme Court case she disagreed with, she appeared to be criticizing the landmark 2008 ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller, which found the handgun ban in Washington, D.C., unconstitutional.
“I was proud when my husband took [the National Rifle Association] on, and we were able to ban assault weapons, but he had to put a sunset on so 10 years later. Of course [President George W.] Bush wouldn’t agree to reinstate them,” said Clinton.
“We’ve got to go after this,” Clinton continued. “And here again, the Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment. And I am going to make that case every chance I get.”
She also used some of her strongest language yet to criticize the NRA, vowing to take on the gun rights lobbying group and make this a key component of her campaign.
“I’m going to speak out, I’m going to do everything I can to rally people against this pernicious, corrupting influence of the NRA and we’re going to do whatever we can,” she said.
Clinton argued that the NRA has “so intimidated elected members of Congress and other legislative bodies that these people are passing the most absurd laws.”
“The idea that you can have an open carry permit with an AK-47 over your shoulder walking up and down the aisles of a supermarket is just despicable,” she said.
The comments earned applause at the closed-door fundraiser, and demonstrate Clinton’s efforts to appeal to progressive donors as she faces a growing challenge from the far-left candidate Bernie Sanders, who has been criticized by some liberal observers for his broad support of gun rights.
The Clinton campaign did not respond to questions about the specific areas where Clinton disagrees with the Supreme Court. However, the Heller ruling is considered the most sweeping and controversial second amendment decision made by the highest court in recent years.
The Supreme Court affirmed that the Second Amendment granted gun rights to individuals whether or not they were members of an organized government militia in 2008. That ruling overturned the District of Columbia’s total ban on ownership of handguns and other strict forms of gun control. It also created the legal precedent that continues to influence all federal court rulings related to Second Amendment cases.
The NRA responded to Clinton’s remarks in a statement to the Free Beacon.
“Hillary Clinton just doesn’t get it,” said Chris Cox, the executive director of the NRA’s legislative division. “The NRA’s strength lies in our five million members and the tens of millions of voters who support the Second Amendment. A majority of Americans support this freedom, and the Supreme Court was absolutely right to hold that the Second Amendment guarantees the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms.”
The Clinton fundraiser was hosted at the Greenwich Village home of John Zaccaro, a convicted felon. During her remarks, Clinton also proposed the creation of a national infrastructure bank, which she indicated would be modeled on the work done by the Clinton Global Initiative. She did not take questions after her speech.
In a strange sort of way, the creeping tyranny of the past 15 years is causing more and more people to see the wisdom of the Founding Fathers and the Founding Documents.
I’m seeing people who themselves will probably never fire a rifle, much less purchase one, becoming strongly in favor of leaving the 2A alone.
Not insignificantly, Americans are paying attention to what’s happened to Europe, and they’re paying attention to history, namely, that governments that enslaved their people first disarmed them.
Look, if Hitlery seizes power, you can kiss the 2nd amendment good-bye.
Then the first amendment. At first strangers will assault you for having a message on your hat that they don’t like. Then hat messages will be regulated to avoid causing unrest. Then people will simply wear blank hats to avoid trouble. After all, do you want to shoot somebody just so you can say Make America Great Again?
There has been debate over whether the 2nd Amendment does or does not permit private ownership and possession of handguns Yes, I know, everyone on Free Republic thinks it does, and I agree. But not everyone in America thinks that; hence, the debate. However, the Supreme Court HAS stated that there is a personal right to private ownership of firearms under District of Columbia v. Heller and more recently that this provision is incorporated against the states under McDonald v. City of Chicago.
Now, here is the argument I like to use against liberals who think they know something of Constitutional Law in regard to these two cases. Assuming that the personal and individual right to bear arms does not exist under the 2nd Amendment, as they claim, then the recognition of that right in D.C. v. Heller is an example of Substantive Due Process, the creation of an individual right by the Court. And it’s incorporation against the States in McDonald is an extension of that.
Substative Due Process is the same legal theory that brought us Roe v. Wade, Loving v. Virginia (right to marry) and Griswold v. Connecticut (right to privacy) and Obergefell v. Hodges (gay marriage). So, as a liberal, if you don’t like the Court’s use of Substantive Due Process, you are arguing in effect that all of those cases are wrong, and should be overturned. Or, in the alternative, you are making a subjective assessment that there are rights you like and rights you don’t like, which is just another confession that Substantive Due Process is inherently flawed because of its subjectivity.
As a liberal, if you support a right to abortion in Roe v. Wade, logically you have to support the rights to bear arms in D. C. v. Heller. Otherwise you are engaging in intellectual hypocrisy. I have not yet found a liberal who can adequately explain away this conundrum without admitting they are being subjective or selective without any logical basis for it.
I have found three things in life:
1) A liberal position always has an element of hypocrisy to it. You can always find an instance where they have used a logical premise and argument to pursue a policy directly contrary to what they are now advocating;
2) People, including liberals, do not like having their noses rubbed in their own hypocrisy. It’s the main reason why the Pharisees crucified Jesus.
3) Of all human failings, hypocrisy is the one I despise the most, and I enjoy than rubbing people’s noses in it.
Clinton is WRONG!
We have that all the time in Israel. Terrorists are the old normal here, but they don’t get very far.
There will be about 400 million guns when (if) you become POTUS, witch: http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2015/09/us-will-reach-400-million-private.html
Good luck getting enough of your flying monkeys to try to take them...best invest some taxpayer money in body bags for those flying monkeys stupid enough to obey your orders, you’ll need them.
In an age of activists judges, it doesn’t matter what the Constitution says. It matters what the Supreme Court says. The Court allowed slavery for 100 years, Jim Crow for another. The Court can not only ban private ownership of guns, they can ban speech supporting gun rights. There is no higher authority.
This damn psycho cannot get anywhere near the White House!
She doesn’t have to “take on” the Supreme Court.
All she has to do is appoint yet another gun-hating lesbian.
Then the five of them put their pointed heads together, take on a carefully vetted appeal and overturn Heller.
Presto, our legal firearms are illegal and the 2nd amendment is gutted. Then it’s on: Civil War II.
Agreed! Then it’s on!
Shitlery doesn’t know the difference between an AK-47 and a SKS.
Or she does, and is lying, which is a more likely explanation.
Yup. Hillary’s liberal activist court would gut the individual right to keep and bear arms. She MUST be defeated! Go, Trump!
“The idea that you can walk down the street surrounded by a crew of heavily armed gunthugs, like some third world dictator, is just deplorable,” we replied.
Worth posting again and again, of course, but actual date should always be noted.
This is why I DESPISE the “never-Trumpers” and their nonsense. These idiots do not understand that a HRC win will lead to total judiciary tyranny from the Supreme Court down throughout our court system. I am well aware of their counter point that they think (wrongly) that Trump will be just as bad in this process. There are only two REAL choices and staying home is not one of them if they love their republic.
“I can to rally people against this pernicious, corrupting influence”
Hillary PROJECTING
“This is why I DESPISE the “never-Trumpers” and their nonsense. These idiots do not understand that a HRC win will lead to total judiciary tyranny from the Supreme Court down throughout our court system. I am well aware of their counter point that they think (wrongly) that Trump will be just as bad in this process. There are only two REAL choices and staying home is not one of them if they love their republic.”
This election is LITERALLY a referendum on whether the USA continues on as the nation that our parents and grandparents bequeathed to us, our children and our grandchildren - or not. Hillary is in the “not” camp, and any vote that is not cast for her strongest opponent is a form of support for her. Period - there is no escaping that particular logic. Staying home or voting Turd Party when you’d normally be a Republican voter, is essentially 1/2 of a vote for her and, of course, a vote for here (like Bush 41 and many members of his family - piss be upon them - will apparently cast) is a actual vote to end this country. It is the very antithesis of conservatism.
“Look, if Hitlery seizes power, you can kiss the 2nd amendment good-bye.”
Keep talkin’ Hillary! and Timmy.
There are millions of gunowners. Any of them that vote for Hillary! are insane, or evil.
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.