31fd1d44-b416-4bdc-ada9-9267a7930c79

As I never grow tired of saying, if the anti-second amendment crowd didn’t have bad arguments, they’d have no arguments at all. A blog called Addicting Info published an article written by someone named Sarah containing the following excerpt, which showed up in my news feed this morning. I hesitate to call this a leftist blog, since it appears to be little more than a partisan screed for the Democratic Party, and I’ve known some leftists who have at least made an attempt to feign intellectual integrity; partisan operatives less so . . .

There’s nothing like seeing this on a Monday morning before your first cup o’ joe:

The NRA has mastered the art of manipulating their simple-minded members and followers into purchasing more and more firearms and ammo based off of lies that claim Democrats want to take their guns.

For the last seven years, we’ve heard nothing but lie after lie about President Obama taking everyone’s guns and making us vulnerable as a nation. Ironically, he’s actually expanded gun rights, and not ironically, it doesn’t seem he ever has taken, nor plans to take, anyone’s firearm.

However, this line sells guns. It gets people to run out to stores and stock up on guns and ammo. The NRA is in bed with the gun manufacturers and it’s, quite honestly, a clever little scheme they’ve doctored up to profit off people too stupid to realize they’re being manipulated.

Now, with Hillary Clinton being the front-runner in the Democratic field of choices for President of the United States, the NRA has wasted no time redirecting their lies to spread misinformation about the former Secretary of State….

She’s gonna take yer guns!!! Quick, go to the store and buy as much as you can! This has nothing to do with profit! She’s gonna take yer guns!!!

I mean, c’mon now. How stupid do you need to be to believe this hype? “She wants to control over every aspect of you right to keep and bear arms — so she can deny it at will.” Really?? I personally like the double dash before the end of the sentence for added drama. Well played.

Does Clinton want to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines? Yes she has said this. However, is that banning all weapons and ammunition? No, not at all. Is this “control over every aspect of your right to keep and bear arms?” No, not at all. After recent shootings where high-capacity magazines were used and the death toll could’ve been dramatically reduced, this is just common sense, and to not agree with it is selfish. They’re not needed in civilian use.

Follow that argument? Hillary! doesn’t want to take your guns. Well, not all of them. I mean, yes, she does want to take your rifles, but you’ll still be able to own certain types of state-approved guns. Like in California. Or New Jersey. That’s just common sense confiscation, I guess.

Recommended For You

80 Responses to Hillary! Doesn’t Want to Take Your Guns … Except the Ones She Wants to Take

    • Yes, like her supporting mandatory vaccination, it’s for the children. Funny how losing your rights is always for the children.

    • Elian (the former kid) wants back in, deported at gunpoint by Billary.

      http://nypost.com/2015/05/18/elian-gonzalez-wants-to-visit-us-get-on-facebook/

      (D)’s, liberals, and rinos are stupid, but they are stupid-crazy when it comes to guns.

      It doesn’t matter how bad a president we have, when there are millions of stupid people (113% of the “eligible” voters on average) out there who can’t wait to do it again. I BLAME ALL OF YOU.

      – Bitter Clinger

    • It’s all about the children… except when they talk about abortion… then they are not children or even people.

      Yes PEOPLE killed other people using a gun to the tune of more than 12000 LAST YEAR. That is what the abortion rate is for a single WEEK.

      Oh yeah… and I also believe that people need protection from their government and also when that government fails to maintain civil peace such as in every instance where the police stood down during the riots.

      I’m reminded of the mime of the rioters smashing a police car with the note… the police are here to protect you… except when they are not.

      An AR 15 in the home will deter and number of roving rioters. A group of well armed Korean business owners proved that point when the riots broke out in LA after the Rodney King incident.

      Funny no one wants to acknowledge that those guns… mostly AK-47’s were effectively used without firing a single shot… to protect homes and businesses from the lawless.

  1. Gun control is working in Baltimore, whose homicide total is going to be higher than 2007 at the current rate. The amazing thing is that a lot of the deaths are headshots from moving cars. Now *that* is some gun control.

    • If the head shots were to those who were targeted you’d be right. How many of the head shots were to unintended bystanders?

      • Zero. The police report that upwards of 60% of the homicides are head shots.

        Actually I forgot… everyone is an innocent victim in Baltimore.

  2. Speaking of just how stupid an individual has to be to believe, well, something stupid…how about those high capacity magazines now! Golly, ever hear of the Henry Rifle, there snowflake? Introduced for testing in 1862, or what is more commonly known as a century and a half ago turns out even a Newtown grade maniac could pull off the same rate of fire.

    • Was that the one you could load on Sunday and shoot all week? Or was that the Spencer?

    • Or how about Virginia Tech. Still the deadliest mass murder in US history. What did the shooter use. Two handguns with “safer” 10 round magazines.

      Also, if Sara thinks the “assault weapons” ban would be the end of it, Gabby Giffords and Mark Kelly cut the legs out from under that argument in Oregon. They said they only wanted UBCs. Now that they got them, now they want due process eliminating gun violence restraining order or enabling revenge for a bad break up orders more appropriately.

      Sorry Sarah Cancontrolemotions, we know how Ovary Clinton and her supporters like you think.

      • That is the deadliest shooting in US history, it is far from the deadliest mass murder. It isn’t even the largest school killing. Guns aren’t deadly enough for those distinctions.

      • And don’t forget that one of those two handguns was a Walther P22. What is commonly written off as the lowliest of rounds was a part of this tragedy.

  3. Wow, that article read really poorly… and we’re the simple ones… actually, it is pretty simple! Shall not infringe.

  4. You’ve got some really rancid stuff on your feed there Mr. Paulsen. has anybody ever heard of that blog before today?

  5. Does Clinton want to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines? Yes she has said this. However, is that banning all weapons and ammunition? No, not at all.

    Given the lack of definition of “assault weapon”, it’s pretty darn close. Currently, the state of New York considers a .22 plinking pistol with a threaded barrel to be an “assault weapon”. If a .22 pistol can be banned as an “assault weapon”, then any firearm in existence can be banned.

    After recent shootings where high-capacity magazines were used and the death toll could’ve been dramatically reduced…

    [citation needed]

    As pointed out in previous posts (I won’t link-spam this one), the typical spree shooter uses about 150 rounds. Magazine-capacity limits would do absolutely nothing to stop them.

    And quite often, those spree shooters take care of themselves, by committing suicide while still having ammunition yet to expend and with responding personnel still several minutes from making any attempt at interdiction.

    The only thing that will ever reduce the death toll caused by a spree shooter is armed resistance.

    …this is just common sense…

    We tried it your way. The AWB that was in place from 1994-2004 did absolutely nothing to the crime rate. Banning “assault weapons” is as ineffective toward any legitimate government interest as would be the ban of “high-capacity” magazines.

    …and to not agree with it is selfish.

    Why, yes: fighting against immoral and unconstitutional infringements of my natural, constitutionally protected rights is self-serving. But unlike your agenda of civilian disarmament, my self-serving interests also benefit all other law-abiding people, and does not leave them vulnerable to criminals and totalitarian governments (but I repeat myself…).

    They’re not needed in civilian use.

    So, you support police departments giving up their AR-15s, since they’re not needed in civilian use?

    But first: would you kindly point out to me where “not needed in civilian use” is listed as an exception to shall not be infringed?

  6. The problem with this complaint (at least the first one that comes to mind) is how stultifyingly predicable it is. “Banning assault weapons and high capacity is only reasonable. Right? We just want to win on these two things so this is not really about taking people’s guns . . . ” Only it really is about taking people’s guns and that’s something, to her complete dismay, that the NRA’s yahoos and red-necks have already figured out. What we’re seeing is a pathology, utterly predictable and completely specious. It gets repeated again, again, and again because, really, this is the only argument the gun-controllers have. And it ain’t workin’.

    • Exactly. When banning those evil black rifles and their “high-capacity” magazines fails to work because criminals will continue their evil deeds, the liberal voices will cry: 1) for forced confiscation, and 2) for expanded “common-sense” bans to include high-powered rifles (sniper rifle!) and low-powered rifles (mass murder training tools!).

      Oh, them “double dashes” used for dramatic effect are called en dash or em dash, depending on the printing device. Full disclosure: I am not a professional writer and I know this.

  7. ‘For the last seven years, we’ve heard nothing but lie after lie about President Obama taking everyone’s guns and making us vulnerable as a nation. Ironically, he’s actually expanded gun rights…’

    Did I miss something? What exactly has the big B.O. done to ‘expand’ gun rights?

      • While ignoring his multiple public addresses in support of various forms of victim-disarmament, of course.

        The fact that President Obama’s previous voting and longstanding proposal record hasn’t been SUCCESSFUL in banning all firearms anywhere from civilian ownership does not negate the fact that he *HAS* agitated – and voted for – assorted sorts of firearms restrictions and outright bans for pretty much the entirety of his political career.

      • Had to look it up, but wow, B.O. actually did sign a pro-gun piece of legislation. Of course that probably had to do with congress attaching it to a credit card reform bill that B.O. was pushing for. That may be the biggest political compromise ever out of this administration.

        BTW. One thing I came across is that while it is legal to carry a firearm on federal land, it’s still a big no-no to carry in a federal building. So anyone out enjoying the park might want to leave the gat in the car before walking into a visitor’s center at a national park. Hadn’t thought about that before.

    • He did several anti gun things.

      -Banned the return of M1 Rifles and Carbines from South Korea

      -Banned Kalashnikov Concern rifles for a stupid reason nevermind the fact we can still get AK’s from Molot as well as guns from the Tula arsenal but no KC is scawy bad.

      -Banned 7n6 ammo killing off the growing popularity of the 5.45 market.

      -Banned Steyr AUG pistol-caliber kits.

      -Tried to get an AW passed using with Operation Fast and Furious with Holder taking the fall for that one.

      -Attempted to ban (yet not done) on 5.56 ammo

    • Tom, you know the more I see her picture, and the more the years go by, the more I think she is starting to look as bad as Dianne F., from our neighboring state.
      It’s either that, or I got to start reading the labels more closely on what I’ve been drinking.

  8. ” … and to not agree with it is selfish”. Right away, we know this is NOT a gun person. Not being a gun person, they will accept the arguments they really don’t understand as “common sense”. And now, they can say we’re “selfish” for having a different opinion about a topic beyond their experience and understanding. I don’t think we’re the “simple-minded” ones here.

  9. “I mean, c’mon now. How stupid do you need to be to believe this hype?”

    In that, I think she said it all. But wouldn’t you think that someone planning to put forth all manner of absolutely true, beyond a doubt, obvious common sense info would at least take 10 minutes to examine all those truths? If a person was honest, I mean.

  10. Correction: Some STATE level gun rights have been expanded DESPITE Obama’s attempts to further infringe on them federally.

    • -Banned the return of M1 Rifles and Carbines from South Korea

      -Banned Kalashnikov Concern rifles for a stupid reason nevermind the fact we can still get AK’s from Molot as well as guns from the Tula arsenal but no KC is scawy bad.

      -Banned 7n6 ammo killing off the growing popularity of the 5.45 market.

      -Banned Steyr AUG pistol-caliber kits

  11. But I’m sure she supports the bill just introduced to ban online ammo sales and reporting of bulk in-person sales.

  12. Well, a few months ago Obama came pretty close to taking away our ability to buy M-855 ammo.

    Gov Malloy and his hack legislators took away my ability to buy magazines with more than 10 rounds (which rather crimps the ability to shop for handguns over the internety), and took my ability to buy most semi-auto, magazine-fed shoulder weapons.

    So yeah, there’s no threats out there.

    • Obama….

      -Banned the return of M1 Rifles and Carbines from South Korea

      -Banned Kalashnikov Concern rifles for a stupid reason nevermind the fact we can still get AK’s from Molot as well as guns from the Tula arsenal but no KC is scawy bad.

      -Banned 7n6 ammo killing off the growing popularity of the 5.45 market.

      -Banned Steyr AUG pistol-caliber kits.

  13. I limiting the law abiding to just 7 rounds, then why isn’t reasonable to then ban all semiautomatic or manual firearms that can hold more than 1 bullet. After all, nobody should need more than one shot to kill a deer. [sarcasm off]
    If they get away with 7 rounds, they will see how far they can get the courts to let them push.
    Big Guv Pols want the US to look like Mexico. No middle class. Just the ruling class elite, the criminal elite that pay of the ruling class elite, and the poor who must do what the ruling class and criminal class demand if they want to live.

  14. I recall Hillary once stating something like “child and gun should never be mentioned in the same sentence”. That is not a ban, but it is still very anti-gun to suggest children should not be allowed to learn to shoot.

  15. Addicting Info is one of, if not the source, putting out the misinformation that the NRA were hypocrites for banning firearms at the meeting in Nashville. Conveniently overlooking the fact that they were complying to the facilities gun free zone policies. Then they lurked away from that one.

    • There was no GFZ at the NRA convention. Many people, including me, were armed there. In fact, word went out before the event that TN allowed either open or concealed carry with a permit, and that TN accepts pretty much every state’s permits.

      The only “restriction” was that all of the guns on display at the manufacturers’ booths had the firing pins removed.

  16. And of course we know she had this to say about “assault weapons” and “hi-capacity” magazines which Sarah conveniently left out.

    “We cannot let a minority of people — and that’s what it is, it is a minority of people — hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people.”

    Forget about owning one, in her eyes you can not even be allowed to hold a viewpoint that doesn’t involve banning them. Her emphasis on using minority status as a reason to not let someone do or think something was met by absolute crickets from the self proclaimed party of minorities and all things good.

  17. Does it even really matter what Hillary says anymore? She’s a lying opportunist, she’ll say anything at the right time, to gather votes or cover her ass. We’ve all seen it time and time again. No one right of center believes she’s honest about anything she says, it’s only a matter of how many that lean to the left will be honest with themselves about her.

    • It matters because she is the presumptive Democratic Party candidate for president in the next election cycle in a country that is numerically closely split between the two parties. Hate her all you want, she is smart, tough, and has decades of local, national and international political experience that no Republican candidate can match. Cruz, Rubio, Walker and Paul are mere novices, Huckabee is a nonstarter, and Perry did not play well at all the last time around. I don’t think the country will back a black neurosurgeon with no political experience who seems to want to govern by the Bible, either. I am not hearing any love for Bush, even if his dad thinks that he is the smarter of the two brothers. Unless something drastic happens, the Republicans will need to find a David to slay this Goliath, or she will be our next president, and right now, it seems the Republican Party is leaderless and divided.

      • Oh so accomplished but when asked to describe her biggest accomplishment her answer was that she had logged millions of airplane miles. Snicker.

        She only has a chance due to MFM being in the tank for her.

        • Don’t delude yourself. the same people that want to take away your “assault weapons”, ban M855 ammo, regulate ammo sales, and require universal background checks no matter how many times we patiently explain to them that these are useless gestures that will not reduce crime are the same people who will vote for Clinton and against the Republican Party. she has more than a chance.

  18. Steven Hansmann
    My dream; a group of terminally ill liberal Democrats buy firearms from gun shows without any sort of checks, go to the NRA headquarters, and shoot everyone in the building…….a boy can dream, an’t he?

    You’ve been warned

    This guy works as a nurse too.
    https://m.facebook.com/steven.hansmann

    • The dream involved is that somehow he can make NRA headquarters a “gun free zone” so that his esteemed killers can get past the front door.

  19. I was there at the first go around of the Clintons in the Whitehouse disaster, and Sarah’s blog is naive at best and a shill at worst.

  20. LIES! She wants to take them all, she’s just not been caught on tape saying that specifically.

  21. But wait… if the Government bans magazines having a capacity of 30 or more bullets then wouldn’t the next lower capacity magazines be defined as “high capacity” which would, sooner or later, theoretically force a ban on them until there are magazines of zero capacity? Hmmm…

  22. Agan. Hillary will NOT be the dem nominee. The witch of Littlerock is terminally damaged goods.

    An effective smokescreen for whatever else the demtards are doing. DON’T watch the bouncing ball/swinging watch.

  23. But I buy my firearms and ammunition, not out of fear of losing them, but because I enjoy going to the range as a hobby. Am I still a simple-minded NRA follower, or does this fact upgrade me to morally impaired shill of the evil Gun Industry, Inc.?

  24. Hillary Clinton: “We’ve got to rein in what has become an almost article of faith that anybody can have a gun anywhere, anytime,” she said. “And I don’t believe that is in the best interest of the vast majority of people.”

    Source: Wall Street Journal, “Anywhere, Anytime Gun Culture” , May 6, 2014

    Hillary Clinton: “I will also work to reinstate the assault weapons ban. We had it during the 1990s. It really was an aid to our police officers, who are now once again, because it has lapsed–the Republicans will not reinstate it–are being outgunned on our streets by these military-style weapons.”

    Source: 2008 Philadelphia primary debate, on eve of PA primary , Apr 16, 2008

    Ballotpedia on Hillary Clinton:
    Absolute right to gun ownership: Strongly opposes

    “…this is just common sense, and to not agree with it is selfish.” Well then color me selfish.

    Oh and by the way from our fearless leader: “As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right.”
    April 16, 2008, Democratic Primary Debate, National Constitution Center in Philadelphia

  25. “…The NRA has mastered the art of manipulating their simple-minded members”

    But -we- would never do that to -you-, dear reader, you are different, you are better.

    I find these kinds of things to be hilarious. Go back and read it slowly. “Person of Topic doesn’t want your guns because s/he hasn’t tried to take your guns.” They are literally saying the Persons of Topic aren’t trying to take guns because they personally haven’t walked down the street knocking on doors to take guns.

    Literal Boy, the Side Kick to Captain Obvious! Together they can dumb down any conversation to something even a three year old would agree with because if you agree with them you get cookies.

  26. The liberal set gets pissed off when their tactics are used against them. Everytown uses the same “manipulative” tactics the writer accuses the NRA of using.

    Oh and Johannes, Addicting Info is a click-bait spam blog and not a real authoritative journalistic entity.

    • I was kind of wondering whether it was or not. It was stupidly over the top, but at the same time, not that different from arguments put forth by purportedly serious people. (Shoulder thing that goes up, anyone?)

  27. The liberal media has mastered the art of manipulating their simple-minded members and followers into giving up more and more of their personal rights and liberties to the government based on repetitive lies that claim ‘it’s for the children.’

    There, “Sarah.” Fixed it for ya.

  28. However, is that banning all weapons and ammunition? No, not at all. Is this “control over every aspect of your right to keep and bear arms?” No, not at all.

    In other words, as long as some form of “weapon” is legally available to some members of the public in some form, “no one wants to take your guns away!” That’s right. As long as I’m allowed to keep a knife in my kitchen, which is legally considered a weapon in some contexts, we’re good to go and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is not being infringed.

    People with this opinion are not my compatriots. They’re subversives trying to enslave us.

  29. Hillary is not just about banning guns (wasn’t she the mover for the “assault weapns” ban?). Seems to me that her true view point is revealed in the following statement:

    “We cannot let a minority of people, and that’s what it is, it is a minority of people, hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people …” Hillary Clinton on a CNN Live Townhall…..June 16, 2014.

    She doesn’t want to merely ban guns. She want’s to “re-educate” those of us who rely upon the Constitution of the United States of America!

    • That particular commentary — I think it was the answer to a question from a friendly audience member — really puzzled me until I read it carefully. Then her “key messages” stood out loud and clear.

      Tell ’em, Hillary:

      “I believe that we need a more thoughtful conversation. We cannot let a minority of people — and that’s what it is, it is a minority of people — hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people …. I was disappointed that the Congress did not pass universal background checks after the horrors of the shootings at Sandy Hook.

      I don’t think any parent, or any person should have to fear about their child going to school or going to college because someone for whatever reason, psychological, emotional, political, ideological, whatever, could possibly enter that school property with an automatic weapon and murder innocent children, students, teachers.

      Yes, we need to thrash this out in the political realm. But the vast majority of Americans, even law-abiding gun owners, want background checks that work. Information that is shared immediately, and an awareness that we’re going to have to do a better job protecting the vast majority of our citizens, including our children, from that very, very, very small group.”

      And now for my view 😉

      “We cannot let a minority of people — and that’s what it is, it is a minority of people — hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people.”
      Wait, what? We can’t let someone hold a viewpoint? She’s dismissing the 1st Amendment while clearing her throat to trash the 2nd. And what exactly is this viewpoint that supposedly terrorizes everyone? From where she takes the conversation, it appears to be opposition to UBCs. Which, it should be noted, wouldn’t have done anything helpful in Sandy Hook or any other mass shooting.

      “I don’t think any parent, or any person should have to fear about their child going to school or going to college because someone for whatever reason, psychological, emotional, political, ideological, whatever, could possibly enter that school property with an automatic weapon and murder innocent children”
      See what she did there? “Fear…children… school…college…political…ideological…automatic weapon…murder innocent children.” She’s conflating people who don’t agree with her political views and desire for UBCs with mass murderers of children. Oh, and if we don’t pass UBCs, someone for whatever reason, whatever, could get automatic weapons!

      “…we’re going to have to do a better job protecting the vast majority of our citizens, including our children, from that very, very, very small group.”
      That’s you (in case you didn’t know). Yes, you, the very, very, very small group of people against whom the vast majority of people — can I mention children again? — need to be protected.

      Because of your viewpoint.

      • yeah that struck me as odd too. but very deliberate. people like her really want to control people’s viewpoints. that is how sick they are.

  30. One thing I’ll say for her, Clinton is consistent. She doesn’t respect any part of the Constitution from what I can tell. She’ll treat the 1st, 4th and 5th Amendments just as poorly as the 2nd at least.

  31. Can anyone tell me if, at any point in time, did the NRA ever proclaim “Obamuz gon’ take yer gunz!”, or are the lefties just recycling fringe group comments and claiming that the NRA said it?

  32. Does Clinton want to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines? Yes she has said this. However, is that banning all weapons and ammunition? Yes, this is just a first step.

  33. damn. that article got slammed into oblivion by the pro-gun crowd. congrats people! you made the author on that piece look incredibly stupid.

    ‘oh nobody wants to ban your guns…except scary looking assault rifles and magazines over 10 rounds…”

    hoplophobes love talking about both sides of their fvcking mouth

  34. The NRA has mastered the art of manipulating their simple-minded members and followers into purchasing more and more firearms and ammo based off of lies that claim Democrats want to take their guns.

    So, they OPEN with ad hominem? The lowest ranking logical fallacy?

    I’d gladly match wits with the author of that drivel, but it wouldn’t be sporting as she is “intellectually unarmed.” I’m an NRA Life member with a doctorate degree, but I’m “simple-minded,” eh? I’m “too stupid” to realize I’m being “manipulated.” Yeah. OK.

    What a pathetic and vacuous tirade that is devoid of a single vetted fact. It’s nothing more than emotional hyperbole. Actually, it’s not worth our attention, as it is beneath the intellectual station of most of us.

  35. Say what you will about HC, she is a huge danger to our liberty, but the anti’s are at it again in WA State with Billions of dollars behind them. SAF went to battle over I-594 and the Judge told them to take a hike, would even listen. OR just took a hit on BS background checks. The anti-groups are having a party. More party is on the way and there is no big backers to stop them. I see firearms being a thing of the past in WA, OR, NV, CA inside 10 years unless someone with money can fight Bloomberg/Gates, etc. I feel sick.

  36. Wow…

    The NRA is in bed with the gun manufacturers and it’s, quite honestly, a clever little scheme they’ve doctored up to profit off people too stupid to realize they’re being manipulated.

    You hear that people? Hillarious rotting ham states the millions of NRA members are in fact… “stupid.”

    • I’ve always said; it’s not “guns” they hate, it’s us. “Guns” are simply a proxy for all us dimwitted white trash that live in fly-over country and are too stupid to accept the benevolent guidance of the Whole Foods shopping, yoga mat totting, urban intelligentsia.

  37. Just imagine having the same laws in effect as Chicago… last weekend had another 49 shot. How’s that working out?

Leave a Reply

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