Former First Lady Hillary Clinton Hits Senator Bernie Sanders on Gun Control

If you watch the video above — and I know that’s like asking you to listen to nails on a chalkboard (ask your parents) — the narrator says “The Brady Bill would have mandated background checks for gun purchases.” WOULD HAVE? Ignorance aside — no wait. Why would we do that? Ignorance is how both Ms. Clinton and Senator Sanders roll when it comes to gun control. “In our state, guns are used for hunting,” the self-proclaimed socialist progressive (progressive socialist) proclaims, denying the fact that . . .

Vermont gun owners use their firearms for self-defense, defense against government tyranny and shooting soda bottles (ask your parents). Or that gang bangers use guns for hunting, too. Anyway, if you missed last night’s debate, don’t worry. Be happy that either candidate — or Hillary’s yet-to-be-named, less-indictable replacement — will get out the pro-gun vote. And how. And that neither one is hiding behind “I support the Second Amendment but…” weasel words. Yet.

comments

  1. avatar Right to arm Bears says:

    Send them both to the gun-free utopia of Chicago. No gun violence there, right?

    1. avatar Oblamo binLyen says:

      They already are/were in DC, can’t get closer to the Leftist Paradise than that can you. Well, except for New Yak City.

  2. avatar Accur81 says:

    Open challenge: if you oppose gun ownership for self defense then set the example by dismissing your armed tax-payer-funded security detail.

    1. avatar 505markf says:

      Maybe they could flip a coin to see who goes first?

      1. avatar Alexander says:

        If they do that, I’ll give them a coin with two tails…

    2. avatar ThomasR. says:

      How silly you are Accur81. Bernie and Hillary will be the first to tell us that they need armed security. Their important people. Their “elected officials”, forget about them actually letting the despicable words come out their mouth as to being our public servants.

      1. avatar BillC says:

        They’re.

        1. avatar Mk10108 says:

          Thank you. I suck at writing but even I know better.

      2. avatar int19h says:

        At least as of September 2015, Sanders didn’t have either a private security detail nor Secret Service protection.

  3. avatar 505markf says:

    Watched some of that debate out of a sick curiosity. Was like watching Tuesday night at the Retirement Home when the residents got amped up on cough medicine and argued about who had it hardest back in the day.

    They can say what they want. Do what they want. I don’t care anymore. I don’t need their permission nor their acceptance to be who I am nor to own what I want nor to carry what I choose.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      So Sanders was pitching his proposal to bring back Matlock, was he?

  4. avatar Geoff PR says:

    You want gun manufactures liable if their product injures or kills someone?

    O.K., as long as car manufacturers are liable if their product was used in a DUI injury or manslaughter, or any other criminal act.

    Oh, you say cars aren’t designed to kill people?

    You’re right. They aren’t. Yet they callously kill tens of thousands annually.

    Guns are designed to cause injury or death if used in self-defense.

    Yet 300 million-plus of them are so defective they kill a few tens of thousands annually…

    1. avatar Oblamo binLyen says:

      How about suing every Ecofreaks that wanted to ban DDT, based on false data, that is now killing over 600,000+/year because of Malaria. Now we have the other mosquito born illness that could have been reduced.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        Look at it this way:

        The Zika virus creates babies with tiny shrunken heads, making them perfect Progressive potential voters…

        1. avatar barnbwt says:

          Also worth mentioning, ‘pinhead’ birth defects used to be way more common way back during cotton/sugarcane days in the American south. Can’t help but wonder if, like Malaria, pesticides had nearly annihiliated Zika (and who knows what else) before Silent Spring was published by that idiot woman. Malaria was supposedly less than a decade from being extinct on Earth, yet saving some useless raptor birds was considered more important than mankind’s deadliest nemesis.

  5. avatar Arkansas kurt says:

    Sorry guys, I can’t watch it. feeling a little sick in the stomach anyway, and really don’t feel like puking. I’m just gonna assume it’s blah blah blah gun control because blah blah blah guns.

  6. avatar Mk10108 says:

    This hurts on many levels. The thought that my generation defeated communism, the youngsters not willing to work, get the carrot dangle of college loan forgiveness, meanwhile Shrillary yaps about emails pulling the defection maneuver of having a private server, which she admits deleting…why don’t know who’s on first.

  7. avatar Hannibal says:

    Can’t watch it, although it’s not like it matters… I know what she’s about.

    Incidentally, the title “former first lady” is absurd here and comes off as belittling (okay) and a little sexist (not necessary). The fact that she’s a former senator and secretary of state is much more relevant.

    1. avatar A Speer says:

      I agree with you that she is no lady. As a compromise, I would suggest referring to her as an “anticonstitutional hellbeast.”

  8. avatar Ralph says:

    And now you know why the MSM is going full retard on guns. It’s Hitlery’s signature issue — in fact, it’s her only issue — which is why she’s so batsh!t crazy to seem more anti-gun than that old commie Bernie Panders.

    Once that crusty old b!tch is finally retired in November, gun control and the culture war will begin to fade out.

    Of course, if either Hitlery, Panders or Bloombast wins, you can kiss your freedom goodbye. Kiss the country goodbye too.

    1. avatar Arkansas kurt says:

      The student loan forgiveness carrot that is being dangled really pisses me off. 10 years ago when I graduated high school I made a calculated decision to forego college and to take up a trade and go to work. I decided that spending 100k dollars to get a formal 4 year degree was a bad investment. I work. I don’t mind working, and I will continue to work for the rest of my life. All the assholes who went into 6 figure debt for a college degree that they can’t get a job with and therefore can’t pay back their loans are gonna try and elect a socialist that is going to use my tax dollars that I have contributed over the past decade to pay off their bad decisions. fuck those guys. edit, sorry ralph. I meant to reply to mk10 above you

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        @Arkansas kurt, any time that you want to post something as profoundly sensible as you just did, you go ahead and post it anywhere you want.

  9. avatar W says:

    Many closeted or in-denial Democrats hate to admit this, but Democrats are pretty much united on striving for more gun control. If someone doesn’t believe this, then just read their party platform. It’s a mere google away.

  10. avatar TXGal says:

    Hillary is on record championing gun confiscation like in UK & Australia.
    There is no taking it back. No matter that slick Willie has probably told her to STFU about gun control extremes until after the election.

  11. avatar Denner says:

    “the self-proclaimed socialist progressive (progressive socialist)” You got it.

  12. avatar SuperBoomTurbo says:

    Here’s my problem with our candidates on both sides. Trump is east coast, which historically is very anti-gun, regardless of what he says. The Dems are almost always anti-gun, but Clinton’s in particular, and Bernie looks like a weapon ban namee already. Who’s to trust? Cruz, maybe? He’s a fellow Texan, and despite my distaste for politicians, who would you rather have their finger on ‘The Button’, Cruz or the guy who’s tagline is ‘You’re Fired’.
    Yeah…

    1. avatar Mister Fleas says:

      We don’t know if we can trust Trump, but on the other hand we KNOW not to trust Hillary or Bernie.

    2. avatar Daily Beatings says:

      It’s going to be Rubio who takes the nomination. After Iowa he now has the most political endorsements, which is the best indicator of the future nominee:

      http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/

      Rubio is the only candidate that consistently beats Hillary in the general:

      http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_rubio_vs_clinton-3767.html

      5.0 point average in the spread, which is greater than the standard deviation of 2.0-4.0 points for the majority of these polls.

      El Presidente Marco Antonio Rubio sounds pretty good.

      1. avatar YaDaddy says:

        Rubio is an “empty suit.”

        Just wait till it gets to the point they start “back door” talking about the skeletons in his closet.

        Things’ll change real quick.

        1. avatar Daily Beatings says:

          “I reject your reality and substitute my own” – Adam Savage

          Need I say more? No matter your “feelz” the reality is Rubio is going to be the nominee. Which is good because he’ll win the general, then our rights we be safeguarded for the next twenty years when Justices Ginsberg and Breyer thankfully retire.

      2. avatar int19h says:

        >> El Presidente Marco Antonio Rubio sounds pretty good.

        Does he now?

        http://govtslaves.info/marco-rubio-wants-permanently-extend-nsa-mass-surveillance/

        1. avatar Daily Beatings says:

          Does “Madame President Hillary Rodham Clinton” sound better? Better turd sandwich than giant douche:

  13. avatar Sambo says:

    I remember distinctly there being posters on here who not so long ago used Sanders as an example that a Leftist could still be pro gun.

    So where are those posters now? Will they admit that basically all Leftists are lock step in America in denying us our civil right of defense of self?

    1. avatar Former Water Walker says:

      NO. No they won’t. They’ll just troll somewhere else. Anyone with a modicum of intellect could’ve figured out Old bernie was just a fudd-or worse…

    2. avatar int19h says:

      I don’t need Sanders for this. I’m a “leftist” and I am pro-gun. Case closed.

  14. avatar Don says:

    Everything is a calculation with Clinton. She doesn’t have any real beliefs. She’s a big establishment hawk, not as far to the left as Sanders on many issues, so to get a share of those farther left voters she’s going to go in whole hog on guns. I hope it backfires tremendously, and it may because a lot of anti-establishment liberals don’t really care about guns.

  15. avatar Jack says:

    Sure as Hell gonna P**S off Clintons brothers & sisters in the Black Panthers !

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email