Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

One Black Sheep

(458 posts)
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:02 PM Jun 2016

Hillary: "I believe law abiding, responsible Americans have a right to own guns"

This was in answer to the CNN reporter asking about what she thought regarding the Second Amendment. So, looks like that is settled.

She went on to say she would like to see an assault weapon ban re-instituted, and other "common sense" reforms.


77 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hillary: "I believe law abiding, responsible Americans have a right to own guns" (Original Post) One Black Sheep Jun 2016 OP
Most people agree with that statement as well as the statement about the assault weapons ban tonyt53 Jun 2016 #1
Most people don't agree with a ban on assault weapons. A slim majority are against such a ban. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #3
Take that poll into context with the question asked. Ask the question with only the last part. tonyt53 Jun 2016 #4
Phrasing matters, granted. It's easy to play dueling polls. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #5
Instead of using a 2013 poll, how about using this one from today with 57% support for a ban? LonePirate Jun 2016 #33
I'm not surprised such support went up a bit after a tragedy. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #38
What I would do it like to see stated sometime, sarisataka Jun 2016 #2
Maximum of 2 guns At HOME for hunting and, maybe self-defens. No semi-autos. Hoyt Jun 2016 #9
Try to outlaw semiautos and you're making at least half the guns in this country illegal. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #12
Cry me a river, melt em down or stuff down the throats on white wingers and NRA. Hoyt Jun 2016 #16
How likely do you think it is that your proposal will come to fruition? Just reading posts Jun 2016 #18
Tough Australians pulled it off. Just because we've been coddling white wing gunners doesn't mean Hoyt Jun 2016 #71
Without the 2nd Amendment. I repeat: How likely is it that your proposal will come to pass? Just reading posts Jun 2016 #72
"Stuff down the throats" sounds like potentially lethal violence... Marengo Jun 2016 #21
So does strapping on a gun to go to Chuck E Cheese, or patrolling the neighborhood like George Zman. Hoyt Jun 2016 #35
That isn't an answer, try again. Marengo Jun 2016 #41
Sounds like a threat to me. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #39
That at least is a proposal sarisataka Jun 2016 #29
Amazing how in the past people used to just manage with 1.. Kentonio Jun 2016 #31
There still are sarisataka Jun 2016 #37
My grandfather, I'm told, used to say he only needed three guns for hunting: Just reading posts Jun 2016 #42
A wise man, your grandfather. sarisataka Jun 2016 #44
I hunt very little, and I've still managed to accumulate a number of "traditional" hunting rifles. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #49
The problem with 'common sense' reform... HooptieWagon Jun 2016 #6
Excellent post! Shemp Howard Jun 2016 #58
You nailed that. DashOneBravo Jun 2016 #61
Well said. Release The Hounds Jun 2016 #77
Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2016 #7
Takes guts to do the right thing and stand up to white wing and NRA. Hoyt Jun 2016 #11
Legitimate hunting rifles and shotguns, you bet Warpy Jun 2016 #8
Try to outlaw semiautos and you're making at least half the guns in this country illegal. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #10
Similar crud was predicted on public smoking and Australian gun laws. Hoyt Jun 2016 #13
Public smoking isn't a Constitutional right, and Australia doesn't have a 2nd Amendment. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #14
Fuck the second amendment. It's bullshit just as slavery was bullshit. hunter Jun 2016 #65
Feel free to try to repeal it, then. Good luck, you'll need it. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #66
I don't have to tolerate gun loving yahoos in my discussions. hunter Jun 2016 #69
So don't participate in such discussions. Problem solved. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #70
This discussion is about our presidential candidate and her position on guns. hunter Jun 2016 #73
Therefore whether or not such a postion is wise or politically astute is wholly on topic, yes. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #75
Regulation of guns and smoking makes California a better place. hunter Jun 2016 #76
All 4 of my shotguns are semi-auto. GulfCoast66 Jun 2016 #15
A lot of people here seem to think you need to turn them in to be destroyed. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #17
Yep GulfCoast66 Jun 2016 #20
Agreed. All the cries here to ban semautos aside, it's not happening. Period. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #25
With the price already to high and going up every single day Warpy Jun 2016 #19
I only wish I could bet my rent money that all semiiautos in this country will not be outlawed in, Just reading posts Jun 2016 #27
Because it's too hard, we shouldn't try? scscholar Jun 2016 #52
So all of my bolt action rifles are not Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #46
But she wants to ban assault rifles frazzled Jun 2016 #22
Is there something wrong with that? rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #23
Not in my view, this post is meant for anyone who may have missed Hillary's recent interview re: One Black Sheep Jun 2016 #24
Ok thanks just checking eom rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #26
Ban semi-automatic rifles completely Matrosov Jun 2016 #28
I agree with her. Dem2 Jun 2016 #30
Yep, Hillary has got this one right, IMHO. One Black Sheep Jun 2016 #32
So just to clarify.. Kentonio Jun 2016 #34
That was not covered in the interview. So, not sure about that. One Black Sheep Jun 2016 #40
That is what we have been trying to say liberal N proud Jun 2016 #36
Ok TeddyR Jun 2016 #43
Personally, I think you are on the right track but maybe smaller magazine liberal N proud Jun 2016 #45
This might be easier to implement than an AWB TeddyR Jun 2016 #48
What do you do about the billion+ normal capacity magazines already in circulation? Just reading posts Jun 2016 #50
I'm a pro-Second Amendment type TeddyR Jun 2016 #53
I agree with hillary gwheezie Jun 2016 #47
All gun owners are responsible and law-abiding, until they're not. TransitJohn Jun 2016 #51
The Orlando shooter was on a watch list and still purchased a gun liberal N proud Jun 2016 #55
No. Most people shouldn't TransitJohn Jun 2016 #57
Except that where guns are concerned, most people DO remain responsible... beevul Jun 2016 #63
He was removed from the watch list after the FBI closed their investigation. n/t PoliticAverse Jun 2016 #60
Anyone on a watch list shouldn't be able to buy a gun SickOfTheOnePct Jun 2016 #74
Would that also be true for anyone who possesses an object or device... Marengo Jun 2016 #59
Duh TransitJohn Jun 2016 #62
"If you don't love guns more than your own children, Rocknrule Jun 2016 #54
Why does what she say even matter? GummyBearz Jun 2016 #56
How do you determine who is law abiding and responsible? n/t Humanist_Activist Jun 2016 #64
It's all in the definition of "commonsense reforms". Crunchy Frog Jun 2016 #67
I don't. I think we should stop coddling gun lovers. hunter Jun 2016 #68
 

tonyt53

(5,737 posts)
4. Take that poll into context with the question asked. Ask the question with only the last part.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:15 PM
Jun 2016

Make it illegal for non-law enforcement citizens to possess semi-automatic guns known as assault riffles? You will get a completely different response The way a question is asked does make a difference.

 

Just reading posts

(688 posts)
5. Phrasing matters, granted. It's easy to play dueling polls.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:16 PM
Jun 2016

I think it's fair to say that the country is divided roughly 50/50 on this issue.

 

Just reading posts

(688 posts)
38. I'm not surprised such support went up a bit after a tragedy.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:53 PM
Jun 2016

A couple of months support for such a ban will revert to the previous level. It always does.

sarisataka

(18,474 posts)
2. What I would do it like to see stated sometime,
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:05 PM
Jun 2016

Rather than what should be banned, what is definitely permitted?

 

Just reading posts

(688 posts)
12. Try to outlaw semiautos and you're making at least half the guns in this country illegal.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:21 PM
Jun 2016

Never going to happen.

Maximum of 2 guns At HOME

The average gun owner in this country has 8 guns. What happens to the "extra" guns?

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
71. Tough Australians pulled it off. Just because we've been coddling white wing gunners doesn't mean
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 04:42 PM
Jun 2016

we have to in the future.

 

Marengo

(3,477 posts)
21. "Stuff down the throats" sounds like potentially lethal violence...
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:29 PM
Jun 2016

Is that what you are advocating?

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
35. So does strapping on a gun to go to Chuck E Cheese, or patrolling the neighborhood like George Zman.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:51 PM
Jun 2016

sarisataka

(18,474 posts)
29. That at least is a proposal
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:45 PM
Jun 2016

However for someone who hunts small game, deer and ducks 2 guns would not be sufficient and we haven't even considered home defense

sarisataka

(18,474 posts)
37. There still are
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:52 PM
Jun 2016

General purpose calibers. For instance you could use a 12 gauge for any of those activities. It is not optimum and you are risking wounding animals and letting them get away or perhaps you kill the animal but it is so badly damaged that the meat is no longer edible.

I was considering that you would most appropriately use a small caliber rifle for the small game a mid caliber for deer and then a shotgun for birds. Those are typically the type of people would hunt with to ensure clean and humane kills while Hunting.

 

Just reading posts

(688 posts)
42. My grandfather, I'm told, used to say he only needed three guns for hunting:
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:56 PM
Jun 2016

A .22, a 12 Gauge, and a .30-06. That's enough to hunt anything in North America.

Of course, just because something is "enough" is no reason to mandate such a limit. And that "three gun solution" doesn't address self defense.

sarisataka

(18,474 posts)
44. A wise man, your grandfather.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:02 PM
Jun 2016

On the rare occasions I hunt it is usually one of those three that I select to go out with. I have however acquired a couple of other options over the years.

 

Just reading posts

(688 posts)
49. I hunt very little, and I've still managed to accumulate a number of "traditional" hunting rifles.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:10 PM
Jun 2016

In addition to various .22s, a Browning BAR in .300 Magnum, a Marlin .45-70, a Swedish Mauser sporterized with a Mannlicher-style stock.

Right now I'd probably choose my AR-10 in .308 to hunt big game.

 

HooptieWagon

(17,064 posts)
6. The problem with 'common sense' reform...
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:17 PM
Jun 2016

...is that neither side is using common sense. One side wants to ban everything except 16th century blunderbuss. The other side has no problem allowing fully automatic weapons and grenade launchers. The common sense answer lies in the middle, but anyone taking a position in the middle is viciously attacked by the extremists on both sides. So nothing gets done. Nothing will get done. Too much $ to be made in donations by advocating extremist positions...compromise dries up the donation pipeline.

Shemp Howard

(889 posts)
58. Excellent post!
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:49 PM
Jun 2016

I'd add one more thing to your excellent comments. Neither side here is capable of making an argument without insulting anyone who disagrees with them.

Gun control extremists call gun owners "gun humpers" who don't care who lives and who dies. NRA extremists call the gun control people fascists who want to turn the US into North Korea.

It's like two nasty children screaming at each other on a playground. And that's no way to make friends and influence people.

Response to One Black Sheep (Original post)

Warpy

(111,124 posts)
8. Legitimate hunting rifles and shotguns, you bet
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:18 PM
Jun 2016

Maybe even non auto pistols.

Semi auto weapons and military style long guns? No.

The price for the ability of the average schmuck to own these things is just too high.

 

Just reading posts

(688 posts)
10. Try to outlaw semiautos and you're making at least half the guns in this country illegal.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:20 PM
Jun 2016

Never going to happen.

 

Just reading posts

(688 posts)
14. Public smoking isn't a Constitutional right, and Australia doesn't have a 2nd Amendment.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:23 PM
Jun 2016

Not the best analogy, there.

hunter

(38,301 posts)
65. Fuck the second amendment. It's bullshit just as slavery was bullshit.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 03:01 PM
Jun 2016

Guns are disgusting.

Smoking is disgusting too.

Both are a public health hazard.

hunter

(38,301 posts)
73. This discussion is about our presidential candidate and her position on guns.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 05:19 PM
Jun 2016

I think there's no reason for Clinton to appease the radical gun crowd. They're not going to vote for her anyways, and it might be for the best if those gun lovers who can't stomach Clinton or Trump sat out this election.

Living in a community where guns are a very serious problem (cops and other "law abiding" citizens included, not just the gangsters) I have no tolerance for gun love. I can't imagine using a gun for "self protection" either. Fact is, the bad guy shoots first, and by the time more guns come out everything is FUBAR anyways. Guns escalate the disagreements we humans have among ourselves, and in the case of suicides, the arguments we have within ourselves.

I've been in many rough situations, worse than more sensible people ever expose themselves to. I've stumbled upon strangers in my home, and people breaking into my cars. I've confronted armed people. A gun wouldn't have made me feel better in any of these situations. I don't need a gun to feel secure. I feel more secure without one. Guns are not a good solution to any problem, except maybe hunting for food or putting down literally rabid wildlife. Nothing you'd need more than one or two bullets for, unless you are an idiot.

The second amendment is bullshit, a relic from a time guns were primitive and owning slaves was legal.

The defenders of it are relics too, and rarely progressive in any way.



 

Just reading posts

(688 posts)
75. Therefore whether or not such a postion is wise or politically astute is wholly on topic, yes.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 05:36 PM
Jun 2016
I can't imagine using a gun for "self protection" either.

Then you're very much out of step with the American people as a whole. From Gallup:
'


I don't need a gun to feel secure. I feel more secure without one.

So don't get one. It's your choice, after all....and being pro-choice is a good thing, last I checked.

The second amendment is bullshit, a relic from a time guns were primitive and owning slaves was legal.

And it's the law of the land. Since you don't like it, you can start working on repealing it. Get back with me in a few decades and let me know how the struggle is going.

hunter

(38,301 posts)
76. Regulation of guns and smoking makes California a better place.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 06:17 PM
Jun 2016

If you want charts and stuff, try this:



http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027919642

Your chart tells me most Americans are wrong. But that's always been the case about so many things.

Hell, U.S. American chose Reagan over Carter. The "average" U.S. American isn't too bright, and frequently votes against their own best interest.

Am I an arrogant SOB? Yes I am.

A good leader tells people what they need to hear, not what they want to hear.

 

Just reading posts

(688 posts)
27. I only wish I could bet my rent money that all semiiautos in this country will not be outlawed in,
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:41 PM
Jun 2016

say, the next 5 years.

It would be the easiest money I'd ever made.

 

scscholar

(2,902 posts)
52. Because it's too hard, we shouldn't try?
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:20 PM
Jun 2016

Your defeatist kind is why so many of us are constantly dying in the streets. Dying in the streets.

 

Duckhunter935

(16,974 posts)
46. So all of my bolt action rifles are not
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:02 PM
Jun 2016

authorized? They are military long guns. One dates to 1926

frazzled

(18,402 posts)
22. But she wants to ban assault rifles
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:34 PM
Jun 2016

Her position is identical to Obama's.

Whatever we think (and I hate guns of any type, truly madly deeply), the Supreme Court, for whatever it's worth, already decided that individuals have the right to own guns (but left stand that restrictions could apply). It's incumbent upon the president or potential president to follow decided Constitutional law, whether it was decided wrongly in their opinion or not.

There is zero wrong with Clinton's statement, so I don't know what this OP is about.

 

rjsquirrel

(4,762 posts)
23. Is there something wrong with that?
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:34 PM
Jun 2016

A vast majority of Americans support that position. Just not crazy or criminal people owning deadly assault weapons.

I'm a hunter and I hold her exact views. Semi-auto guns need to be tightly restricted indeed. But not all guns for most people.

One Black Sheep

(458 posts)
24. Not in my view, this post is meant for anyone who may have missed Hillary's recent interview re:
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:39 PM
Jun 2016

the gun control debate.

It has been a hot topic lately.

 

Matrosov

(1,098 posts)
28. Ban semi-automatic rifles completely
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:42 PM
Jun 2016

That's the only way to ban assault rifles. The AWB from 1994 was a complete joke.

Dem2

(8,166 posts)
30. I agree with her.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:47 PM
Jun 2016

We need to find a way to restrict weapons of mass slaughter from those who would chose to use them for what they are designed for.

The best solution is to simply severely restrict the sale of war weapons similar to how we did back in the 40's for fully automatic weapons.

 

Kentonio

(4,377 posts)
34. So just to clarify..
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:51 PM
Jun 2016

She wants law abiding citizens to be able to own them, but also wants law abiding gun manufacturers to be able to be sued, if anyone goes crazy and uses one of their weapons to commit a crime?

One Black Sheep

(458 posts)
40. That was not covered in the interview. So, not sure about that.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:53 PM
Jun 2016

That is something specific that you would have to google about, I don't know the answer.

liberal N proud

(60,332 posts)
36. That is what we have been trying to say
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:52 PM
Jun 2016

But the gun nuts are all twisting everything that is said getting all convoluted about terminology to distract from the problem.

Let's have an honest conversation and I want to see the gun advocates propose something solid instead of defeating everything that is said.

 

TeddyR

(2,493 posts)
43. Ok
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 12:59 PM
Jun 2016

Instead of banning the weapon impose magazine capacity limits of 20 rounds. Semi-auto rifles don't fire any faster than semi-auto pistols and certainly aren't "weapons of war," at least in the sense that they aren't used by any military in the world.

liberal N proud

(60,332 posts)
45. Personally, I think you are on the right track but maybe smaller magazine
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:02 PM
Jun 2016

20 rounds could still do some considerable damage. You need something that limits the duration that one can shoot continuously so that maybe they could be jumped.

If you can't kill what ever you are hunting with 5 shots, then you need to go the firing range.

 

TeddyR

(2,493 posts)
48. This might be easier to implement than an AWB
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:10 PM
Jun 2016

And certainly easier than banning semi-automatic weapons altogether (which I don't think will ever happen). But at some point I believe the magazine limit becomes too small (5 is too small IMO). A handful of states have 10 round limits and those have held up to legal challenges so far. NY had a 7 round limit and that was struck down, in part because nobody currently produces a 7-round magazine. But there are plenty of stories about people needing significantly more than 5 rounds to protect themselves, either because they missed a bunch of times or because the times they hit did not stop an attacker. I suspect you MIGHT get a 20 round limit passed but anything less than that would be difficult, and I don't think there's any way that a law restricting you to less than 10 rounds would pass.

 

Just reading posts

(688 posts)
50. What do you do about the billion+ normal capacity magazines already in circulation?
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:13 PM
Jun 2016
If you can't kill what ever you are hunting with 5 shots, then you need to go the firing range.

Most states already restrict magazines capacity while hunting....and in any case, hunting isn't the issue at hand. The right to keep and bear arms is.
 

TeddyR

(2,493 posts)
53. I'm a pro-Second Amendment type
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:21 PM
Jun 2016

But the argument regarding the magazines already in circulation applies to just about any gun control proposition that would result in a ban. For example, with an AWB you still have millions of those weapons in circulation that simply aren't going to be turned in by their owners. I'm not sure that doesn't mean you don't implement some sort of restriction on future sales. As I mentioned, Maryland and California, and maybe a few other states, already have some sort of limit in place.

And to be clear, in my opinion AR-15-type weapons aren't "weapons of war" or "machine guns" or "weapons of mass destruction" and are subject to Second Amendment protections. But if you are using them for hunting then you don't need a 30 round magazine, and I personally think that a sidearm is a much better home defense weapon (or even a shotgun). I also don't own one, though I probably would if the one I was interested in didn't cost $1000+. So I could live with (not necessarily be hugely in favor of) a law that limited magazine capacity. That said, doubt it would pass in the current climate.

TransitJohn

(6,932 posts)
57. No. Most people shouldn't
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:33 PM
Jun 2016

because most people won't always remain responsible and law-abiding. That was supposed to be the point of my TIC post. Cheers.

 

beevul

(12,194 posts)
63. Except that where guns are concerned, most people DO remain responsible...
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 02:41 PM
Jun 2016

Except that where guns are concerned, most people DO remain responsible and law abiding.

That isn't opinion, that's fact. Problems with guns are caused by less than 1 percent of all who own them.

SickOfTheOnePct

(7,290 posts)
74. Anyone on a watch list shouldn't be able to buy a gun
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 05:25 PM
Jun 2016

Of course, the Orlando shooter wasn't on a watch list...

 

Marengo

(3,477 posts)
59. Would that also be true for anyone who possesses an object or device...
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:55 PM
Jun 2016

Capable of inflicting harm on another person?

 

GummyBearz

(2,931 posts)
56. Why does what she say even matter?
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:32 PM
Jun 2016

Her opinion changes all the time. She says what her pollsters say is more popular. Apparently now that Bernie has been dispatched, shifting to the right is the correct move to increase the odds of her winning. So what?

hunter

(38,301 posts)
68. I don't. I think we should stop coddling gun lovers.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 03:29 PM
Jun 2016

Guns are a public health menace, like cigarettes.

People should be encouraged to quit guns.

Cigarettes killed the Marlboro Man, and likewise, many gun owners and their family members are killed and maimed by guns.



Second hand smoke is dangerous, so are second hand bullets...





Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Hillary: "I believe ...