Hillary Clinton and Common Sense Gun Control

Debunking the Common Sense Gun Control debate.

Posted by on

Let's get one thing straight right from the get-go. The phrase "Common Sense Gun Control" is an oxymoron of the first order. If common sense were rightfully applied to the gun control issue, it would immediately recognize that the presence of guns has nothing to do with the propagation of violent crime in American society. Historical fact bears this out.

Prior to the Gun Control Act of 1968, rifles and shotguns could be delivered by the U.S. mail right to your home without a background check-and yet gun crime was a fraction of what it was today. Guns were sold abundantly without a background check in places long forgotten today by those who wish to obscure or eliminate history, and not just in gun stores. Did you know the original Vance Outdoors location on Cleveland Avenue was started in a grocery store, and operated concurrently with the grocery store for several years? Did you also know that the old Lazarus Department store-which was later bought out by Macy's-marketed its own line of sporting firearms? My father-in-law goes deer hunting every year with his trusty 12 gauge Lazarus pump shotgun.

With this in mind, whenever a politician like Hillary Clinton jumps on the back of a hearse talking about "Common Sense Gun Control" in the aftermath of a tragic shooting event like the one at Umpqua Community College, my ears and hackles both perk up because I know what that means.

For Mrs. Clinton, "Common Sense" in terms of gun control would truly spell disaster for the individual citizen, the Constitution, and the firearms industry as a whole. Fortunately for us, Mrs. Clinton, in a race to "out radical" her primary opposition following their first debate, has proudly declared her true intent and nature.

The first, and I think actually most disastrous part of her machinations is her intent, if elected, to repeal the current federal law that protects firearms dealers and manufacturers from being sued by victims of people who carelessly or purposely misuse firearms purchased, possessed or stolen by them. Suing gun manufacturers and dealers for the misuse of lawful products by others would be akin to allowing car manufacturers to be sued by victims of those who drive their cars drunk or irresponsibly and kills or injures others.

On top of this proposal, Mrs. Clinton now openly disagrees with not just the Second Amendment, but of the recent Supreme Court decisions that ruled the Second Amendment means just what the founders said-that owning a firearm for defense of person and country is a right protected by the Constitution. She now declares with impunity that she would use her executive power to confiscate any and all firearms she wished to ban just like they did in Australia and England. This is her solutions to mass shootings of unarmed people in public places like Umpqua Community College in Oregon.

Umpqua was one of many shootings that could have been prevented rather easily, and not by reinstating the Clinton's failed 1994 Assault Weapons Ban. Here is how.

Umpqua Community College was until recently, presided over by a former east coast cop who today is busy covering his behind. He allowed Umpqua to remain a campus wide open to the rampages of criminals armed with firearms. The college had recently voted to maintain campus security in the form of an unarmed security guard, instead of hiring armed security or police personnel. The former president said he didn't want to change the environment of the college by having armed security guarding students and staff. He further tried to cover himself after the shooting by saying that an armed security officer could not have stopped the shooter anyway. I just bet this guy was just a ball of fire when he worked the street as a cop. Between not providing armed security, and maintaining a policy of "no guns allowed" for anyone but lawbreakers, the shooter selected Umpqua as his target rather than several other potential targets that featured armed protection. The myriad of laws in place at the time, including laws against murder, failed to stop him. Bullies are cowards who will only stop when force is applied against them. They are not stopped by counseling, rules, and regulations.

In laying out her plans, Mrs. Clinton has failed to recognize that much has changed since the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban was enacted by her husband. As president, Mrs. Clinton would love to reinstate it as a "first step" in getting her other schemes enacted. But here is her problem. Prior to the ban, ownership of military semi-automatic rifles by civilians and cops alike was not as common as it is today. Back then, Colt was really the only game in town if you wanted an AR15. In fact, the shooting population was split over the issue, and too many declared that since they didn't need an "assault rifle" no one else did either. Well Mrs. Clinton, I've got news for you. Today the AR15 is the top selling rifle for all sorts of sporting purposes, and more to the point, it's the premier self-defense long gun purchased today-no matter which of the hundreds of manufacturers you purchase one from. This means that this time the shooting public will be united against this and any other "common sense" efforts to violate the Second Amendment.

We have been warned personally by Mrs. Clinton, what she and the other candidates from her party wish to do. As a side note, we know that the current occupant of the White House is thinking the same things. We now know what "common sense" means to them. In return, we need to show them what "common sense" means to us, and use it when the time comes at the ballot box.