Hillary Clinton Ducks and Weaves 2A Questions

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestyoutube

During a recent interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, Stephanopoulos asked her — directly — twice if the Second Amendment protects an individual right to arms. Her answer? Watch the video below, or read the attached  transcript:

Stephanopoulos: Do you believe that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right, that it’s not linked to service in a militia?

Clinton: 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 regulation.

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.

So that is exactly what I think is constitutionally permissible.

And once again, you have Donald Trump just making outright fabrications, accusing me of something that is absolutely untrue. But I’m going to continue to speak out for comprehensive background checks, closing the gun show loopholes, closing the online loophole, closing the so-called Charleston loophole, reversing the bill that Senator Sanders voted for and I voted against, giving immunity from liability to gun makers and sellers. I think all of that can and should be done, and it is, in my view, consistent with the Constitution.

Stephanopoulos: And the Heller decision also does say there can be some restrictions. But that’s not what I asked. I said do you believe…their conclusion that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right?

Clinton: If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulation. 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 regularity, responsible actions to protect everyone else.

So, help us out. Did she answer the question?

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

20 thoughts on “Hillary Clinton Ducks and Weaves 2A Questions”

    1. So, I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t recognize a communist if one bit you in the butt.

  1. 99% of the demos don’t want YOU to have a firearm, but it is A-OK for them and their body guards.
    There are a lot of republican RINO traitors also.!!
    ONCE you are disarmed….you can look it up about China and Tinnerman Sq, and / or Hitler !!

    1. It was Tianaman Square but your point is well taken. It is people control that they want. What a total waste of oxygen she is, she should just just go away and free up what she is using for something useful like a dog or gerbil.

    2. “Clinton: If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulation.”

      First, in the Heller decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the right to bear arms is an individual constitutional right. So, she is wrong in doubting that.

      However, and this is a big however, she is absolutely correct when she states it is subject to reasonable regulation. In Justice Scalia’s own words, “Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56.”

      Note that Scalia states: 1) The Second Amendment right is not unlimited. 2) Laws can be promulgated to prevent carry in certain locations. 3) Concealed carry can be restricted. 4) Laws can be passed to impose conditions and qualifications on the sale of firearms.

      So, apparently, the Supreme Court’s interpretation of “…shall not be infringed,” is significantly different than the NRA’s.

      1. And that’s why one left or right leaning administration shouldn’t be able to stack the Court with biased opinions. A handful of citizen Justices (9) should be observant of the US Constitution and quit revising decisions based on pressure from whomever holds the office of the Presidency.

        The 3 Branches of Government shouldn’t be controlled by any of the others. These elected officials and appointees swear an Oath to the Constitution as it was written. It is not a living document. Add Amendments to it, and quit revising the existing Amendments of it, to suit an ideology.

        The POTUS should not be responsible for selecting the Supreme’s. Particularly when their party controls both the House and Senate. I don’t care who’s in charge. There’s something wrong with a monopoly mentality, that’s what got us the ACA. There should never be a party monopoly in two or 3 branches of government. It’s a recipe for disaster and we’ve been witness to it before and look where it has gotten us. A complete and utter mess and it’s unfortunate that the people in charge of fixing it, are the people that caused it. Disgraceful…

        One ingredient of the solution is to add term limits to all positions in government. It should not be a career position, nor should a handful of appointee’s be able to determine the rule of law, as they see fit, for a generation or more.

  2. She uses the word “if” concerning the Second Amendment. So NO she doesn’t believe citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. She evades a direct answer. I served in the Air Force for 23 1/2 years and 12 years as an Army Civilian. I want NOTHING to do with her.

  3. She answered as she has all previous questions about 2nd amendment rights–she talks a lot but never answers the question! You can tell that she is lying because her lips are moving.

  4. Sounds to me like the “British are coming”once a again! Wow, just think if back than all the farmers and other law abiding folks did not have arms; I think this would not be the country we are today. I believe that was the main reason our fore fathers agreed and put into place the 2nd amendment. A right to own arms keeps us further away from a militant dictatorship and slows people like Clinton in getting us there!!

  5. In fact the Second Amendment does allow the people to keep and bear just about any arms. At the time it was written, citizens did in fact use the same arms as the military did: rifles, shotguns, pistols, swords, knives, and citizens could own and use cannons. So why is it that today in many states one cannot carry a pocket knife with a blade longer than typically 3 inches? One cannot carry a sword for self defense in many states, or a dirk or dagger. They’re arms also.

    There are citizens who own and use black powder civil war era cannons, legally, and they never commit any crimes. So why can’t they also own more modern cannons if they want? Pre GCA 1968 they could, couldn’t they? Are we, the common law abiding citizen, somehow more evil now than we were pre 1968?

    And the common use test: the Supremes messed that up in the 1930’s when they ruled restrictions on short barrel shotguns were ok because such firearms weren’t used by the military! But in fact the military did use short barrel shotguns. By that same logic, if applied today, then we should be allowed to own and use what the military uses.

  6. obama the clown and hilary just cant stop tell stories or as they say lies. Anyone voteing for this witch better think real hard. Alinski is thier mentor. Who is he you say well he hates americas bill of rights our laws that is. And hildabeast and obozo follow his teachings Wake up all you women that want to vote in hildabeast you better pull your heads out of your butts and do some fact checking she is evil. AND SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED CAN YOU READ hilery.

  7. I would have to say no was her ansewer!!! I know that a question I want to hear Ms. Clinton ansewer on National tv live and unedited is her responses or lack of in the Bengazi investigation.

  8. just remember what she tried to do to semi auto shotguns , (Have them classified as assault weapons) Of coarse she is going to duck the question . and if she wins she will make sure that you can’t buy any Handguns, semi-auto rifles or shotguns. permits and or licensing will be required. it will be back to the stone age. throwing “rocks”
    She doesn’t care how many people she puts out of work, just as long as she gets “GUN CONTROL” I will gladly give that DUMBA** my bullets one @ a time

  9. dealing with the health coast issue back in 1993 is to support a 25% tax on gun sales??

  10. Read about the New World Order and you will understand why the UN wants control over all guns, food, land/property rights and even your children..Your children can be taken away and you have very little recourse..The childrens hospital took that girl in Communist Connecticut away from her parents..Took almost a year to get Christina back and without a lot of pressure from FOX news, she still would be seperated from her parents..The gov’t wouldn’t even allow the parents to have any visitation..Your land can be taken for the common good..Your property (guns, etc.) can be confiscated..Your personal money can be confiscated..Nothing will be safe without the Second Amendment..!

Comments are closed.