Previous Post
Next Post

Hillary Clinton has picked a fight with the NRA and Second Amendment supporters.  It wasn’t necessary.  From 1995 to 2012, the Democrats had shied away from public fights with the NRA because of the severe beating at the polls they took in 1994 following the Clinton “assault weapons” ban.


It can be argued that the the Democrats gained the presidency of Barack Obama, at least in part, because they stayed quiet on Second Amendment issues during his elections. But after being re-elected in 2012, Obama and the Democrats fiercely went after the NRA…and they lost big in the 2014 mid-terms.

Hillary must believe that the demographics have flipped in her favor. That she can attack the NRA, claim she respects the Second Amendment, and say that the Supreme Court was wrong in holding that the Second Amendment is an individual right — all at the same time — and gain votes.

Here is the clip where she says the enemy that she is most proud of making is the NRA.

Her problem is that she isn’t trusted nearly as much as is the NRA. Her favorability rating is between 10 and 20 points below that for the gun rights org. In spite of surveys that have been widely circulated in “progressive” circles, gun ownership is likely at some of the highest levels ever in the United States.


The other problem for Hillary is that Second Amendment supporters are highly motivated, often single-issue voters. Gun haters, on the other hand, typically aren’t nearly as motivated. They’re a much smaller group and virtually all part of the Democrat voting base already.

Trump, on the other hand, has consistently presented a pro-Second Amendment stance during his campaign. Yes, he has high unfavorables; but an NRA endorsement can work to raise him up against Hillary.

The extent to which the establishment media and Hillary’s (redundant, yes) allies are spinning her position on the NRA and the Second Amendment is extraordinary. Take Politifact, for example.

From Politifact:

Speaker: NRA

Statement: Says Hillary Clinton “doesn’t believe in your right to keep a gun at home for self-defense.”

Ruling: Clinton has never said that. The NRA cited a recording of her saying she disagreed with a Supreme Court case affirming some gun rights, but the same recording shows Clinton is clearly talking about concerns other than keeping a gun at home for self-defense. She specifically talks about someone going armed to a grocery store. We rate this claim False.

Politfact conveniently ignores that Hillary is a lawyer, and the Heller case didn’t rule on people going to the store with an AK-47.  The case was about the right of the people to own guns in their homes for self defense. On that, she was perfectly clear:

“So I’m going to speak out. … The Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment, and I am going to make my case on that every chance I get.”

Politifact went on to claim that Hillary’s statement in 2015, long after the Heller decision in 2008, was the same as the Bush administration’s concerns about the case before it was decided. They argue that because President Bush could not have been against the right to self defense in the home before the decision was made (far from proven), Hillary’s statement years after the decision, which was all about the individual right to self defense in the home, could not be seen as opposing self defense in the home.

The argument makes no logical sense. Yet this is what passes for a defense of Hillary’s stand on the Second Amendment.

The NRA ad will resonate with voters. It’s not that the NRA has a direct quote of Hillary Clinton saying that she wants to confiscate all American’s guns in her first term. No one, at least until recently, would believe that Hillary would be so stupid as to say such a thing directly.

But very few believe what Hillary says any more. An increasing majority of the electorate believe that she is a liar with a long history of practice.  When someone catches her in an unguarded moment saying that she believes the Supreme Court is wrong on their view of the Second Amendment, then they believe she’s being truthful.

If it comes to a choice between Hillary and the NRA, the NRA wins.

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. It should also be noted that Chelsea Clinton said, ‘when my mom becomes president, we’ll be able to get rid of the guns’. Since her thinking is so influenced by her parents, her words are a reflection of her mother’s thinking.

    • “It should also be noted that Chelsea Clinton said, ‘when my mom becomes president, we’ll be able to get rid of the guns’.”


      I’m taking her on her word she will pass an Australian – style ‘gun safety’ law if she has the votes.

      I heard an interesting rumor today that Ted Cruz is finally considering endorsing Trump.

      Could Cruz be hedging his bets that he might get a SCOTUS nomination if Trump wins?

    • And if we can infer Hillary’s position based on her daughter’s comments, we can infer Trump’s position based in his sons’ comments. Since both of his eldest sons ardently support the Second Amendment and claim that Trump Sr. supports the Second Amendment (however imperfectly), we can more assured that Trump Sr. supports the Second Amendment.

      • To paraphrase Sgt. Schultz, “I infer nothing. I assume nothing.
        I know nothing!”

        Not this year. Not this election.

        This what grandpa called “crazy ass”.

  2. “Trump, on the other hand, has consistently presented a pro-Second Amendment stance during his campaign.”

    Liar. Dean just forfeited credibility for disregarding Trump’s support of gun bans for those on the arbitrary terrorist watch and no-fly lists and by slyly truncating the relevant time frame to the campaign. That latter willfully ignores Trump’s past and, to my knowledge, never renounced, support for Clinton’s 1994-2004 so-called “assault weapons” ban.


    • You’ve been commenting for a long time, so you have some cred around here. Don’t blow it by being a d!ck. Choose your words more carefully next time. Dean is one of us too.

    • Liar seems a little strong. I will let others decide if Trump has “been consistently pro-Second Amendment” during the campaign.

      As for being “sly” about the timing, I thought it was rather direct, being right in the sentence and all. The article is about the campaign, and the graph of Trump and Hillary’s favorability is only during the campaign. I have written whole articles on Trump’s changes on the Second Amendment.

    • Jonathan’s criticism regarding Trump on Due Process is well-taken. That said, Trump has otherwise been talking a good game about guns and the 2A in this election.

      Trump has supported bans on certain rifles, memorably in that book he wrote 16 years ago. In 2015, he appears to have reversed that position:

      Does he really mean it? I don’t know; I don’t have access to anyone’s innermost thoughts and desires. I can only judge a person based on what they say and do. Trump’s current position is so far just talk…but, of course, his position in 2000 was just talk, too.

      Frankly, I think if a person — politician or no — publicly changes from being anti-gun to pro-gun, or from being slightly pro-gun to slightly more pro-gun, that should be applauded. More people on our side — and who think of themselves as being on our side are good. So is having politicians who are willing to do political deals with us because they think we can help them win elections.

      Finally, I’d like to gently suggest to everyone that it’s better to assume error or misunderstanding of fellow RKBA people before assuming malicious intent. If you’ve got the goods, fine, but otherwise…can’t we all get along?

      • “…but, of course, his position in 2000 was just talk, too.”

        Not entirely. Back in those days, he was giving a fair bit of money to help get Democrat candidates elected. I’m not saying he gave them money because of the gun issue; he most likely had other reasons. But helping anti-gun candidates get elected is a bit more than just talk.

        What it boils down to is that we really have no idea what Trump thinks on any given issue, because he seems to just adopt the views of the last person he talked to in most cases.

    • No one is claiming that Donald Trump Sr. is the foremost champion of the Second Amendment ever to grace the halls of Republican Party. Rather, we ARE claiming that Donald Trump Sr. is stating modest support for the Second Amendment.

      Another important data point: Donald Trump Sr. has a New York City concealed handgun carry license and apparently carries at various times. That alone reveals that Trump at least recognizes the value of being armed personally. And note that if Trump wins he will be the first President in the history of the United States to have a concealed handgun carry license. How cool would that be?!?!?!?

      Finally, Trump declared additional support for the Second Amendment with the list of judges that he said he would most likely nominate to the U.S. Supreme Court. I believe all of those judges would be an asset to us on the U.S. Supreme Court.

      • Donald Trump Sr. is the foremost champion of the second amendment who will be on the ballot for President in 2016. That is good enough for me. Arguing about his opinions 20 years ago is pissing into the wind. Or trolling.

    • I would have agreed with Dean, right up to the moment that the NRA came out in favor of banning sales to people on secret government lists and The Donald grabbed the idea with both hands, not realizing that just because the NRA says something doesn’t make it pro-gun.

      Why Rubio is now trying to ride that particular dead horse is a bigger mystery to me.

      • Look at the actions of NRA, Inc. for the last fifteen years at least, and you will see a consistent pattern of actions that advance and support the criminal police state, not NRA members.

        NRA supported LEOSA, which overrides states rights and allows police and retired police to supersede the laws and regulations regarding carriage of arms in all fifty states. No Duty to Inform under LEOSA by the way. DTI must not really be that important for “officer safety” since cops don’t have to inform. Off-duty and undercover cops, usually black, get shot by on-duty cops on a regular basis, but those stats are usually covered up.

        NRA colluding with the Deep State re. terrorist (whatever that means) watch lists as you mentioned here is another example. NRA can only succeed with their treason based on the low I.Q. and education level of their membership. How many NRA members possess a passport? Answer: none. They never leave the county they grew up in. Why would they? “Everyone knows me around here. I’m one of the good guys.”

        When Illinois state Rep. Brandon Phelps (NRA’s chosen hick) put Duty to Inform back in his concealed carry bill in 2013 after NRA lawyers provided him the language the police unions wanted, many Illinois NRA members just couldn’t figure out why you wouldn’t want to tell the police you were a “card-carrying good guy” when stopped for a traffic ticket.

        These people are too stupid to understand that the minute you walk out your door, anyone can walk up to you on the sidewalk, (lie) state they are a cop, not be in uniform, and you must answer or get killed like Philando Castile in Minnesota. In southern IL where Phelps lives, they drive everywhere and they can’t conceive of someone like Otis McDonald standing on a bus stop in Chicago. Nor do they care. To the racist hicks, black people like Otis are good for one thing, to use as plaintiffs, then get flushed down the toilet.

        NRA can’t even get the lawsuits right, except to interfere with them. After doing nothing to promote gun rights in Illinois for forty years at least, NRA muscled into the McDonald suit at the last minute by hiring former Solicitor General Paul Clement to steal ten minutes from attorney Alan Gura’s thirty minute oral argument time in front of the Supreme Court. Thanks NRA!

        Unpaid grassroots activist Valinda Rowe is the person that introduced Otis to Alan Gura with the idea that he would make a good lead plaintiff for the Chicago handgun ban. In return for his sacrifice, Otis and every black person in Chicago got Duty to Inform in Phelps carry bill, because NRA state lobbyist Todd Vandermyde put it there. What does NRA ever do other than undermine grassroots activists and the Constitution?

  3. Hillary has long been a major enemy of anyone who loves freedom. The NRA has been on the front lines against her for now going on forty years. She hates everything about traditional America which is rather straight forward when you consider that she studied at the foot of Alinsky. If you like your freedom, give to the NRA and every major gun rights organization. They aren’t perfect but they do a hell of a better job than they used to and leftists everywhere hate them. Just making them whine is reason enough to give.

    • Good post, Joe Q.

      The recent NRA TV spots are some of the best I’ve ever seen in my seven decades on this earth.

      And they are in black and white – very apropos on many fronts.

      I’ve sent my money to the NRA.

  4. Trump isn’t perfect. Not even close. Nor are any of you. Personally I’m not a big fan. But I’m gonna vote for him, cause the alternative is unacceptable.
    #never trump = #always clinton. The disdain she has for America is sickening. The fact that people will actually vote for her blows my mind. I would vote for Satan before her. He seems like the lesser of two evils to me.

  5. It’s all about votes in key states folks. She gets 270 and she wins. There is no reaching out across the isles.
    Remember what super O said in 2009 ” we had an we election and I won”

    She will Lord it over all of us.

    So all you Johnson weld people think I Nguyen your smugly going to vote for neither better remember she has huge demographic advantage and it’s going to be close.

    Here’s an idea for a blog story: are you ready for Her as president?

    • Trump is an ass, but I am voting for him so that I can send Hillary a message that says see, we can’t stand you THAT much. Is it possible for us to be any clearer?

  6. I’ve never been a one issue voter. I haven’t voted for a Republican in the last three general elections. I will be this time for two reasons. I despise Hillary as much as I do Dick Cheney and I want Trump to pick a Supreme Court Justice that strictly interprets the constitution. In general I’m and moderate independent that is forced to switch parties because I live in a closed primary state. I’m pro individual freedom and neither party has dibs on that. But I also believe in some social welfare programs and even affirmative action in education. Not jobs. But this time around all my personal beliefs are on the back burner in the general. And until Dems give up their fight against the 2nd. I would like republicans to accept gay marriage and abortion. It would make voting easier for me and add tons of voters.

    • I favor gay marriage and abortion, but I vote 2A. Because I believe that without it, we are left with whatever violence the Federal power structure wants to do to us. And nobody does violence “better” than the feds.

      • Right on. That’s the same place I’ve come to. Neither party has a lock on my principles, and I hate them both. But I hate the Democrats more, because they hate me and my rights more. The Second Amendment is non-negotiable.


    Relevant comments start at about 3:35, question asked at 5:32, highlight at 5:48

    …they’re proactive, and if they see a person, possibly with a gun, or they think may have a gun, they will see the person and they’ll look and they’ll take the gun away. They’ll stop, they’ll frisk, and they’ll take the gun away.

  8. And remember with that survey, NRA approval is going to be less than opposition to gun control thanks to their long list of errors that have turned many gun owners off.

  9. What is NRA, Inc. exactly? Is it a gun rights organization made up of just good old folks from the “real America” who down to the secretaries in the hallways are committed down to their soul to look out for you, or is NRA a self-perpetuating bureaucracy that pays Wayne LaPierre one million dollars per year to make chest thumping speeches to safe audiences at NRA conventions, then laughs at the rubes for being stupid enough to continue sending them money? How did Neal Knox get bumped for Charlton Heston as NRA prez?

    Watch what NRA does, not what they say. I don’t know all the ins and outs of the recent Texas open carry law, but didn’t NRA fail to oppose the police unions in knocking out the prohibition on cops using open carry as the basis for an investigatory stop? Why wasn’t the open carry law passed so that anyone over twenty-one who is a non-felon can strap up and carry, instead of having to be “licensed” by the police state and possess a carry license first? Cui bono, who benefits here? The NRA benefits by continuing to exist and undermining the grassroots that makes everything happen in our world.

    In Illinois, NRA state lobbyist Todd Vandermyde put Duty to Inform w/ criminal penalties in Rep. Brandon Phelps first version of the “NRA backed” concealed carry bill which failed in May 2011. After the U.S. Federal Appeals court in Chicago totally overturned Illinois UUW weapons law in a surprise ruling in Dec. 2012, we had a clean slate and the best chance in FIFTY YEARS since the criminal code of 1963 to pass a decent carry bill.

    Vandermyde put DTI back in Phelps 2013 carry bill, and Phelps argued with Black Caucus legislator Will Davis in open debate on the Illinois statehouse floor for thirty minutes about the dangers of DTI re. profiling of blacks by police. Phelps responded, “it hasn’t been a problem in other states”!!! Now we have Philando Castile in Minnesota shot down in cold blood attempting to inform. Instead of improving the shit carry bill that he passed in 2013, Vandermyde is spending his time trying to legalize suppressors in Illinois. Great work there. No help for the 100,000 plus licensed citizens in IL who are in danger of getting set up and killed by police criminals or police impersonators with Duty to Inform, on to the next project.

    Chris Cox and Chuck Cunningham at NRA/ILA had knowledge of what Vandermyde was doing in Illinois, and they allowed him to do it. NRA is a corrupt rotten front pockmarked with traitors and rats that feast on the blood of their own membership in collusion with police unions.

  10. Statement: Says Hillary Clinton “doesn’t believe in your right to keep a gun at home for self-defense.”

    Ruling: Clinton has never said that.

    The NRA said that she doesn’t believe in your rights to keep an arm. They did NOT say that she openly admits as much. Politifact is either disingenuous or ignorant.

    • But, she has said that the firearm turn in used in Australia sounds good to her. Australia had that turn in because they banned guns. Chelsea Clinton publicly stated that when her mother is elected “we can get rid of the guns”. It is quite normal for the child to reflect the attitudes of the parents, and even to repeat words used by the parents. Hillary may not have stated her intention to take everyone’s guns, but she sure has inferred it is her intent. I think she did say that the 2nd doesn’t apply to certain weapons and that the SCOTUS was wrong in re Heller.

  11. “If it comes to a choice between Hillary and the NRA, the NRA wins.”

    As the saying goes, “from your mouth, to God’s ear”….although in this case, it might be “from your fingers, to God’s eyes”?

  12. Hilary proudly saying the NRA is her enemy is directly analogous to Romney acknowledging publicly that there were 47% of voters who would just never vote for him no matter what. Romney got savaged for “political incorrectness.” Hillary…?


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here