WFB: Hillary Clinton couldn’t definitively say Sunday that the Second Amendment of the Constitution guaranteed the right to bear arms during an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos.
Republican rival Donald Trump has charged that Clinton wants to abolish the amendment. While Stephanopoulos said he knew that wasn’t true, he pressed her on her gun views that have increasingly gone to the left.
“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?” he asked.
“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 regulations,” she said. “So I believe we can have common-sense gun safety measures consistent with the Second Amendment.”
Clinton then went into her gun control platform, but Stephanopoulos hit her for dodging his question, noting the D.C. vs. Heller decision that protected an individual’s right to have a firearm for lawful purposes. MORE
Clinton’s well armed personal militia could not be reached for comment.
What a stupid, elitist crunt.
“……THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE (that would ‘everyday Americans’ to you, Missy) TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.”
She can use that fancy Yale law degree to wipe her fat ass for all I care.
Greetings – Yale degree or the Constitution.
I’m going with the latter. That’s why she calls it her morning constitutional…
She has already said that the Supreme Court is misinterpreting the 2cnd. That sounds like a big NO to me.
“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 regulations,”
There is a nuance here. The right to keep and bear arms is not a Constitutional right. It is an inherent right of a human being to use arms to protect life and liberty that cannot be infringed by any government agency. Note that, unlike the First Amendment where it is prefaced by ‘Congress shall make no law’ is a prohibition on a governmental entity abridging that natural right.
The second Amendment has no such limitation. So this natural right cannot be infringed by “common-sense gun safety measures” by local and state governments either. But that foot has been shoved in the door and gives opening to a granular infringement.
Typical Clinton contortions of the law.
Rights inhere to individuals, not to groups of individuals, and certainly not to institutions. She needs to try to explain the philosophical basis for
I hope she keeps trying to come up with one until she gets it right. She’ll die of old age first, of course, because there isn’t one.
I’m no constitutional scholar, but I am a pretty good shot. Your move.
Don’t think it signifies. We have ample evidence that NOBODY in washington gives a shit what is ‘constitutional’.
Why should this old twat waffle?
When she says something like I believe in the 2nd Amendment and the Bill of Rights but there has to be some common sense restrictions. I realize that she doesn’t know what she’s talking about. I remember an exchange between Senator Cruz and Senator Boxer some time ago when Boxer suggested “common sense” restrictions, read changes, to the 2nd Amendment. Cruz asked her if other Amendments would need changing? She got all huffy-puffy and just proved to be the asshole that she really is. Just like Hillary. Don’t go away Ted Cruz, wee need you.
Moe, I would love to see Cruz on the Supreme Court. I say we dart him like a bear and press him into service.
Of course he’d become a drunkard.
Drunk on liberal tears.
@The Rat Fink:
I think Obama has first dibs on the Constitution. He has his dogs’ handlers use it to clean up after them.
OK, ya got me… THEN she uses it!
Perfect, IOpian.
I was looking for anyone addressing the glaring error you pointed out before I posted.
Here’s what I’d like to drive home about it at the risk of repeating a point.
Let’s take back the language on this on.
It is a Constitutionally PROTECTED right. Not a right that is given by the Constitution.
That’s why one of our founding fathers mentions it’s a self-protecting right.
So let’s take this back and always correct people who think it’s something that can be taken away by striking the 2nd.
It can’t be taken away since it is not given to us by the 2nd. It would only mean a lot of bloodshed until they get the point if they try.
The Bill of Rights are a list of restrictions on the Gov. Not a list of rights granted by a governing body.
WE are the boss of them
Don’t EVER forget that!
A guy on Farcebook posted a picture of an empty warehouse. The caption claimed it was the warehouse where all the handguns Obama has confiscated are stored.
My reply:
It’s also the warehouse that holds every Bugatti Veryon you’ve ever owned. It’s not illegal or unconstitutional to own a Veryon. But with a price tag over $1M, an production run of only 450 units, and services available only in France, you have a nearly 100% chance of never owning one. Whether it’s illegal or not, the result is the same: You don’t have one.
There are many ways to achieve the socialist goal of doing away with guns, without touching the second amendment.
@TN – I would have replied it is a pix of the warehouse were all the newly manufactured guns used to be, until they were bought, because of Obama’s policies.
That’s true as well.
Atheists don’t get to be The Pope.
That doesn’t mean atheists are bad people. That doesn’t mean The Pope is a good person. But the job description precludes one from being the other.
Anyone – everyone – that can say a constitutional element that precludes government interference, can ever, possibly, be altered by a popularity contest, is mentally incapable of being an executive, any executive, of that government. If simply sounding that idea from a script, like an animatronic bear, doesn’t cause an “Oh, HELL NO!” mental break, then you are mentally unfit for an executive, any executive, position in that government. If 100% of the citizens, even the ones ineligible to vote, ALL, already, agree that a onstitutional element is wrong, elicits anything other than “This is gonna’ be the easiest amendment, ever!” from you, then you are mentally unfit for the position.
That doesn’t mean you’re a bad person. That doesn’t mean you’re a good person. But the job description precludes you from even being considered.
Hear! Hear! Kilroy Hear! Hear!
A toast to your post. Salut!
Hillary could effectively BAN the 2nd Amendment and I STILL wouldn’t give up my firearms.
Zero fucks given about what any anti-American fascist thinks.
I WILL NOT COMPLY, AND I STRONGLY SUGGEST ANYONE WHO WISHES TO THINK OF THEMSELVES AS “FREE” START THINKING ALONG THE LINES OF DEFIANT RESISTANCE.
“Freedom” is a lifestyle choice.
“…localities and states and the federal government had a right, as we do with every amendment, to impose reasonable regulations”
So I guess that applies to the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments too, right Hill?
Since the 2nd Amendment was mainly created to protect the citizens from any kind of tyrannical government, government doesn’t have much say-so in the matter, the People do. And the People say KEEP YOUR FUCKING HANDS OFF OF IT IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO KEEP YOUR FINGERS.
Tar & feather that bitch and all the others who feel they are entitled to control the citizens against their will. The government is just a servant of the people, not the master. Their desire for total control is pure evil.
It is our duty to disobey any unconstitutional mandates, and to use our weapons or any other means to defeat tyrants who have no regard for the will of the people. The second amendment is the only license we need. And that is why the evil control freaks want to take it away; you can’t bully free and armed citizens. They want to take the guns first and the freedom next. Pure evil.