Posted on 06/11/2016 7:52:44 AM PDT by Mr. Mojo
Hillary Clinton has no problem calling abortion a “constitutional right,” but when it comes to the Second Amendment, she has refused to take a position.
On Friday, Clinton thanked Planned Parenthood for providing abortions when she said that it was a “constitutional right” for women to get an abortion.
However, last Sunday, Clinton refused to say whether or not the right to bear arms was a constitutional right.
Instead, Clinton criticized late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
“I think that for most of our history there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment until the decision by the late Justice Scalia, and there was no argument until then that localities and states and the federal government had a right, as we do with every amendment, to impose reasonable regulations,” Clinton said. “So I believe we can have common sense gun safety measures, consistent with the Second Amendment. And in fact, what I have proposed is supported by 90 percent of the American people and more than 75 percent of responsible gun owners.”
When pressed again by George Stephanopoulos, if “an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right,” Clinton was even less committal.
“If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulations,” Clinton said. “And what people have done with that decision is to take it as far as they possibly can and reject what has been our history from the very beginning of the republic, where some of the earliest laws that were passed were about firearms. So I think it’s important to recognize that reasonable people can say, as I do, responsible gun owners have a right, I have no objection to that, but the rest of the American public has a right to require certain kinds of regulatory responsible actions to protect everyone else.”
The right to kill is not a constitutional right. It’s absurd.
The right to bear arms is a natural right and the bill of rights says the government can’t take that right away.
the federal government had a right, as we do with every amendment, to impose reasonable regulations,”
Governments don’t have “rights”, people have rights.
Government has only the power given it by the people.
Clinton is a prime example of totalitarian thinking.
Translation: I'm going to take every action I can to keep and/or take away your Second Amendment Right.
Killary—you’re an abomination.
There can be NO COMPROMISE with these nutjobs.
The leftist communists MUST BE DEFEATED and Hillary Rotten Criminal MUST BE THROWN IN JAIL.
“You don’t like havin’ babies? You don’t have to keep those babies.”
In the Democrat’s bassackward world, Donald Trump is a fraud and Elizabeth Warren is a champion for minorities.
That and the fact that a “right” isn’t warranted when it costs someone else. Their life or their money.
So basically, murdering babies is a Constitutional right, but the right to keep and bear arms, even though it’s clearly enumerated in the 2A of the Constitution, isn’t.
Exhibit ‘A’ that progressivism is a both a spiritual and mental disorder.
Actually, the constitution specifies that no person may be deprived of life without due process. To my knowledge, no unborn baby has ever been put on trial, much less sentenced to the death penalty for crimes committed.
This is long with several interruptions for ads...Hillary blathers, her words don't really say anything.
Abortion is NEVER mentioned in the Constitution anywhere, and in fact, there is a “right to life” plainly written in the Declaration of Independence, go read it for yourself.
The right to self defense, from ANY threat, is clearly defined in the Second Amendment, as the right to “keep and bear arms”. “Arms”, incidentally, are not necessarily limited to only muskets, it can include personal means of defense of many kinds, from marital arts to powerful electronic means that incapacitate the assailant, not necessarily killing the person. Infringements have abounded over the centuries since that amendment was adopted, and any honest and unbiased court would strike them down accordingly.
If a baby fails to die after being aborted, is it legal to shoot it?
What the SCOTUS thought about gun control in the pre Civil War era.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0060_0393_ZO.html
It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished;
and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs,
and to KEEP AND CARRY ARMS wherever they went.
>the bill of rights says the government can’t take that right away.
Not just ‘take it away’, but INFRINGE in any/all of its myriad of ways (regulations, restrictions, taxes, fees, licenses, etc.).
Hell, they don’t even follow their OWN ‘logic’! If Rights can be sensibly restricted, why the vitriol/push-back on the 2x-wk ban for abortions? Nope, ANY ‘infringement’ they fight tooth & nail...
“Guns are ONLY designed to kill”. Abortions? *crickets*
Not that the (R) nor GOP even ask the question: “If Rights can be restricted, then you would have no problem with the same ‘laws’ on abortion/voting that you have on the 2nd - license, background checks, waiting period, restrictions of ‘type’...”
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.