Katie Pavlich: Clinton’s war on the Second Amendment

Katie Pavlich: Clinton’s war on the Second Amendment
© Getty

Last week, during the first Democratic presidential debate, gun control became an issue of who is the most extreme in the progressive field when it comes to limiting the Second Amendment rights of American citizens. 

While former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb made sense on the issue, even defending everyday Americans who own firearms to protect themselves, Hillary ClintonHillary Rodham ClintonHannity on attempted advertiser boycott: 'Nobody tells me what to say on my show' Overnight Cybersecurity: Bad Russian intel may have swayed Comey's handling of Clinton probe | Apple sees spike in data requests | More subpoenas for Flynn | DOJ's plan for data warrants Budowsky: GOP summer of scandal MORE failed to mention protecting the Second Amendment rights of Americans and called for background checks already in place under federal law. When asked if she believed her top opponent for the nomination, Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, whose gun control stance stems from pro-gun Vermont, has been tough enough on the issue, her answer was a resounding, “No.” 

ADVERTISEMENT
“This has gone on too long, and it’s time the entire country stood up against the NRA,” the party front-runner said during the debate. 

On the campaign trail, Clinton’s views on guns have been more extreme. The NRA, an organization that has been around since 1871, has been a favorite target of the former secretary of State over past weeks. She’s gone so far as comparing the members of the civil rights organization to Iranian mullahs, who of course are responsible for the murders of hundreds of American citizens. 

“You know, the NRA’s position reminds me of negotiating with the Iranians or the communists. You know there’s no possible discussion and it’s for political purposes. This is the way it works, and it’s pretty cynical. The NRA tries to keep gun owners, the ones who are members, really upset all the time so they can keep collecting their money, because they tell them they’re the only thing that’s going to stop the black helicopters from landing in the front yard and people’s guns being seized,” Clinton said during a town-hall style campaign event in Iowa. “That’s basically the argument they make, and it works with some people, and it has turned a lot of people into absolutists themselves.”

When Clinton compares the NRA to the Iranian regime, she’s comparing Americans here at home to Iranian terrorists. The NRA isn’t a boogeyman, it’s a grass-roots organization made up of 5 million law-abiding Second Amendment supporters. Further, Clinton seems to fail to acknowledge that, if she were to become president, it would be her obligation to represent all Americans, not to compare the ones who believe in protecting Second Amendment rights to America’s enemies. 

On the issue of the absolutism Clinton claims, the opposite is true. The NRA has done significant work with Congress and previous presidents over the decades to improve the mental health system in America in order to prevent guns from being purchased by the mentally ill. 

But while the anti-gun movement has long been intellectually dishonest under the guise of promising to protect hunting rights as the government implements “common sense” and “modest” gun control laws, over the weekend Clinton openly embraced the idea of a national, mandated gun buyback program similar to the one implemented in Australia. 

“Recently Australia managed to get away, or take away, tens of thousands, millions, of handguns. In one year they were all gone. Can we do that? If we can’t, why can’t we?” an attendee at a New Hampshire campaign event asked Clinton. 

“I think it would be worth considering doing it on the national level, if that could be arranged,” the White House hopeful replied, embracing not only a mandated national buyback program but getting rid of handguns in the United States. This statement proves that NRA leadership isn’t wrong when it warns of Clinton’s anti-gun philosophical and policy positions. 

Clinton has promised to use executive power if she wins in 2016 to implement new gun control measures that have repeatedly failed in Congress, even if her administration gets sued for doing so. Her position is not a representation of common sense or modest proposals, it’s confiscation in direct conflict of the Second Amendment and Supreme Court precedent. 

Just like President Obama, Hillary Clinton does in fact want to take away your guns. 

Pavlich is the news editor for Townhall.com and a Fox News contributor.