Hillary on guns...

Discussion in 'Hunters Rights Forum' started by The Other David, Feb 6, 2008.

  1. The Other David

    The Other David Elite Refuge Member

    Apr 15, 2000
    This from her first Senate run... http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/05/09/hrc.guns/index.html

    Hillary Clinton renews call for gun licensing and registration
    By Phil Hirschkorn/CNN

    May 9, 2000
    Web posted at: 6:34 p.m. EDT (2234 GMT)

    NEW YORK (CNN) -- U.S. Senate candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton renewed her call for tougher gun control legislation on Tuesday before an audience of newspaper publishers.

    "We have to do more to stand up to those who refuse to believe the reality that guns do kill and that common-sense gun measures can make a difference," Mrs. Clinton said during a speech to the Newspaper Association of America's annual convention in New York.

    "I believe we need a comprehensive plan to stop gun violence, and it is one of the reasons I am running for the Senate," the first lady said.

    Mrs. Clinton, who is running for the seat of retiring Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-New York), added that she supports proposals that would require the licensing and registering of all new handguns purchased in the United States.


    "We license drivers before they get behind the wheel to make sure they can drive safely. We register cars to make sure someone is responsible for every vehicle on the road. But we don't do the same for deadly weapons," she said.


    If elected to the Senate, Mrs. Clinton said she'd work with Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California) on her bill that would require prospective gun buyers to first obtain a gun license by passing a background check and a safety course exam. The bill would also establish a national registry to record all gun sales.

    Mrs. Clinton also announced her support for the creation of a "ballistic database" for all new guns, requiring gun makers or sellers to fire guns before sale and send that "ballistic fingerprint" to law enforcement.

    Mrs. Clinton suggested that the idea -- proposed earlier this year by New York Gov. George Pataki (R) and included in the government's landmark legal settlement with gun manufacturer Smith & Wesson -- should be implemented nationally.

    "What we would have is a national database of these images that law enforcement officers could use to quickly track down the origins of guns found at their crime scenes and the criminals who use them," Mrs. Clinton said.

    The first lady reiterated her support to require trigger locks on handguns, to hold adults responsible for their children's use of guns, to raise the youth handgun ban from age 18 to 21, to limit gun sales to one per month per adult and to have the Consumer Products Safety Commission regulate guns.

    "It doesn't make much sense that we regulate toy guns but not real guns," Mrs. Clinton said.

    New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, Mrs. Clinton's likely Republican opponent in the Senate race, shares many of her views on gun control.

    For example, Giuliani's campaign staff specified that he also supports handgun licensing and a national registry of handguns. As mayor, Giuliani signed legislation requiring trigger locks whenever guns are sold in the city and outlawing the sale of toy guns that resemble real guns.

    Giuliani also supported the federal assault weapons ban signed by President Clinton and supports Clinton's proposal for background checks at gun shows.
  2. The Other David

    The Other David Elite Refuge Member

    Apr 15, 2000
    Hillary now...http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120053364436796229.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

    MODERATOR TIM RUSSERT: Sen. Clinton, when you ran for the Senate in 2000, you said that everyone who wishes to purchase a gun should have a license, and that every handgun sale or transfer should be registered in a national registry. Will you try to implement such a plan?

    HILLARY CLINTON: Well, I am against illegal guns, and illegal guns are the cause of so much death and injury in our country. I also am a political realist and I understand that the political winds are very powerful against doing enough to try to get guns off the street, get them out of the hands of young people.

    The law in New York was as you state, and the law in New York has worked to a great extent. I don't want the federal government pre-empting states and cities like New York that have very specific problems.

    So here's what I would do. We need to have a registry that really works with good information about people who are felons, people who have been committed to mental institutions like the man in Virginia Tech who caused so much death and havoc. We need to make sure that that information is in a timely manner, both collected and presented.

    We do need to crack down on illegal gun dealers. This is something that I would like to see more of. And we need to enforce the laws that we have on the books. I[I] would also work to reinstate the assault-weapons ban. We now have, once again, police deaths going up around the country, and in large measure because bad guys now have assault weapons again. We stopped it for awhile. Now they're back on the streets.[/I](editorial comment: she assumes the ban brought deaths down and now the lack of the ban is causing them to go up)So there are steps we need to take that we should do together. You know, I believe in the Second Amendment. People have a right to bear arms. (peeing in my pants over this one!) But I also believe that we can common-sensically approach this.

    RUSSERT: But you've backed off a national licensing registration plan?

    CLINTON: Yes.
  3. The Other David

    The Other David Elite Refuge Member

    Apr 15, 2000
    A commentary on Hillary and Obama...

    Hillary goes after Obama on guns - huh?!?
    Posted by Bryan Miller February 04, 2008 2:32PM
    Categories: Hot Topics, Law & Order, Politics
    According to a February 2 CBS News report, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton accused fellow candidate Barack Obama of "flip-flopping" his positions on gun regulation (see http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/02/02/politics/fromtheroad/entry3782752.shtml).

    The report relates that Clinton contrasted an Obama statement that he has "no intention of taking away folks' guns," with his written reply to a 1996 Illinois state legislative office candidate survey, in which Obama responded that he "supported banning the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns."

    Clinton then accused Obama of flip-flopping because he "changed" his position "over a relatively short period of time," which she referred to as "within the space of 4 or 5 years."

    The pro-gun community can smugly chortle over the prospect of Clinton attacking Obama from the Right on guns, while she pretends her true concern is lack of consistency on the issue.

    But Clinton's bait and switch tactic should anger anyone hoping to elect a presidential candidate who might actually pursue a rational policy on guns. Clinton's attack is an obvious effort to frighten some with the false specter of gun confiscation under an Obama presidency, a prospect that is clearly not in the cards in this country, whoever is in office.

    Clinton's attack is highly ironic, as well, both because she has changed positions on guns even more rapidly than Obama, and because she has one of the strongest gun violence prevention (GVP) records of any federal office holder. To wit: Clinton stated her support for national licensing and registration of all newly purchased handguns in a May 2000 meeting with newspaper publishers (http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/05/09/hrc.guns/index.html), but stated during a debate last month in Nevada that she opposed implementing a national gun licensing registry..." (http://cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?parm1=5&docID=news-000002655673).

    Yeppir, there's more than a bit of the pot calling the kettle in Clinton's carefully parsed, but transparent and toxic attack. So, not only is Clinton's arithmetic incorrect as to Obama's so-called "rapidly changed position," but her own stated stance on gun regulation has both changed dramatically and done so in a much shorter time frame. No hypocrisy there, right?.

    And, as far as I can tell, there are minuscule differences between Obama and Clinton on gun regulation, which, to my mind, makes Hillary's attack even more ironic and objectionable. My colleague, Andy Pelosi of Gun Free Kids, has posted an excellent review and analysis of the remaining presidential candidates' positions on guns, which you can view at: http://www.gunfreekids.org/candidates.

    Many of my colleagues in the GVP community view with dismay such hypocritical attacks over gun regulation. We want to elect candidates -- from both parties -- who will be forthrightly and clearly in favor of reasonable limitations on access to firearms.

    Of course, sadly, this year's crop of Republican presidential candidates are all so busy declaring their disdain for anything remotely favorable to GVP that they present no possibility for support from those seeking rational federal gun policy. And this may well continue to be the case for a long time to come.

    So, we must turn our attention to the Democrats. Democrats like Clinton should know by now that pandering to the pro-gun community will not work. How many Dems have to be ostentatiously photographed in duck blinds or loudly claim fealty to the Second Amendment - and then lose - for the rest to realize that such pro-gun nonsense fools no one on either side?

    To pro-gunners, these are amusing missteps by candidates who would never get their votes anyway, and it makes the rest of us yearn for a candidate who is genuine and principled

    To those of us seeking a rational federal gun policy, it's also a reason to distrust and, therefore, eschew voting for attackers.
  4. The Other David

    The Other David Elite Refuge Member

    Apr 15, 2000
    One more, from a debate...

    • Most Obvious Display of Political Pragmatism: All three Democrats said they opposed implementing a national gun licensing registry and effectively acknowledged that establishing strict gun controls is unworkable and a political minus for Democrats, who by and large have in the past been more supportive of gun control measures than Republicans.

    Clinton said she opposed illegal gun ownership and supported a reinstatement of a ban on certain semi-automatic assault-style weapons. But she also noted, “I also am a political realist, and I understand that the political winds are very powerful against doing enough to try to get guns off the street, get them out of the hands of young people.”

    “I don’t think that we can get that done,” Obama said, but added that he would work as president for “common sense enforcement” such as facilitating efforts to trace guns used in crimes to unscrupulous gun dealers.

    Turning to Edwards, Russert said, “Democrats used to be out front for registration and licensing of guns. It now appears that there’s a recognition that it’s hard to win a national election with that position. Is that fair?”

    “I think that’s fair,” Edwards responded, “but I haven’t changed my position on this. I’m against it.” A product of the rural South, where gun ownership is widespread, Edwards said that it is “enormously important” to protect gun owners’ rights. Edwards did say he supported reinstating the so-called “assault weapons” ban.

Share This Page