Hillary: U.S. needs to 'rein in' proliferation of guns

[minnesotatv]

Hillary Clinton: U.S. needs to 'rein in' proliferation of guns
Posted by
CNN's Dan Merica

Updated 2:06 p.m. ET, 5/6/2014

National Harbor, Maryland (CNN) – Hillary Clinton told an audience of mental health professionals on Tuesday
that the United States needs to rein in its gun culture or risk a world where insignificant disagreements could
lead to shootings....

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... n-of-guns/

[Sietch]

This demonstrates the low esteem in which people like her hold voters. They're sure voters will actually buy this crap. Unfortunately, she's right. There are people in my classes working on their PhDs—so smart, right?— who eat this stuff up. Disgusting

[Rip Van Winkle]

The Wicked Witch of the NE must think she needs to shore up her base to go on record with something like this.

[LarryFlew]

apparently she never noticed what happened with the current reining in and what it did for gun proliferation.

[captnviper]

Anyone else see the irony in that statement? As in the militarization of the police, or the fact that the dept of Ed, the NOAA, BLM, and many more now have armed personnel and conduct swat style raids on illegal coral dealers and the like.

[ex-LT]

Anyone else see the irony in that statement? As in the militarization of the police, or the fact that the dept of Ed, the NOAA, BLM, and many more now have armed personnel and conduct swat style raids on illegal coral dealers and the like.

But it's precisely because of the proliferation of guns in the hands of the general public that the police and all the different "alphabet agencies" need to form para-military units, and conduct no-knock and SWAT style raids.

[/sarcasm]

[Sietch]

It's clear to us that Hillary knows better; however, the people who swallow this also actually believe that widespread access to firearms is a novel thing, like a trend that emerged during their lifetimes which is causing new problems, rather than being the status quo for two and a half centuries. They think there's been a sea change in the last twenty years, like things were historically very different, and therefor believe that it's responsible for high crime rates.

Remember those dingbats at the last capitol hearing, "my [insert patriarch]'s guns looked nothing like what people can get today." The knows-jack-**** crowd nods in amazement, like that's a good point, that firearms have changed radically in the last few decades.

[Lumpy]

It's clear to us that Hillary knows better; however, the people who swallow this also actually believe that widespread access to firearms is a novel thing, like a trend that emerged during their lifetimes which is causing new problems, rather than being the status quo for two and a half centuries. They think there's been a sea change in the last twenty years, like things were historically very different, and therefor believe that it's responsible for high crime rates.

How many people remember that pre-1968 you could order guns through the mail, import foreign firearms, and for that matter buy dynamite in many rural hardware stores? It's the ever-increasing regulation/de facto banning since then that's the sea change.

Remember those dingbats at the last capitol hearing, "my [insert patriarch]'s guns looked nothing like what people can get today." The knows-jack-**** crowd nods in amazement, like that's a good point, that firearms have changed radically in the last few decades.

By that standard the Internet should be censored because it's not traditional printing.

Historically, banning the populace at large from possessing effective weapons almost always ended up with the armed elite saying "shut up and do what you're told, you g*dd**m peasants!" And we worry because we're seeing it already: millions of Americans want guns, are unconvinced by anti-gun arguments, and participate in the democratic process to lobby for what they want. Yet gun banners like Hillary are effectively saying "To H*** with what you want, you shouldn't have guns!"

Gun control is dissent control.

[MWAG]

By that standard the Internet should be censored because it's not traditional printing.



Gun control is dissent control.

Bingo! I find it sad that other amendments such as free speech, unlawful search/seizure... have no problem being transferred to today's standards. But better whine about how our forefathers never predicted, or meant, for today's chillun killin salt rifles the same way. Maybe if we go back to wood on our rifles, the antis would be less scared. After all, that's mainly the biggest change in the past 40 years

[MWAG]

By that standard the Internet should be censored because it's not traditional printing.



Gun control is dissent control.

Bingo! I find it sad that other amendments such as free speech, unlawful search/seizure... have no problem being transferred to today's standards. But better whine about how our forefathers never predicted, or meant, for today's chillun killin salt rifles the same way. Maybe if we go back to wood on our rifles, the antis would be less scared. After all, that's mainly the biggest change in the past 40 years