Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday the nation's gun culture has gotten "way out of balance" and the U.S. needs to rein in the notion that "anybody can have a gun, anywhere, anytime."
The former secretary of state and potential 2016 Democratic presidential candidate said the idea that anyone can have a gun is not in the "best interest of the vast majority of people." But she said that approach does not conflict with the rights of people to own firearms.
Clinton waded into the polarizing issue of gun politics during an appearance at the National Council for Behavioral Health conference in Oxon Hill, Maryland, pointing to recent shootings that involved teens who had been playing loud music and chewing gum and a separate incident involving the typing of text messages in a movie theater.
"I think again we're way out of balance. I think that we've got to rein in what has become an almost article of faith that anybody can have a gun anywhere, anytime," Clinton said. "And I don't believe that is in the best interest of the vast majority of people. And I think you can say that and still support the right of people to own guns."
Seems like a perfectly reasonable observation and concern to me, but of course perfectly reasonable does NOT describe the conservatives on this issue, who immediately went after Hillary for daring to challenge every American's right. despite their mental health or criminal background, to own a gun.
Gee look, now the Right Wing has another non-scandal to use against Hillary other than Benghazi.
Hillary Clinton is 100% correct on this issue and screw the NRA and Sarah Palin on their stands!
ReplyDeleteLets start with the Jack booted thugs aka known as Police! http://freakoutnation.com/2014/05/07/texas-police-officer-fatally-shoot-93-year-old-woman-five-times-at-her-home/
DeleteInside Edition did a piece on "Puppycide" last week.
http://www.insideedition.com/videos/2506-inside-edition-investigates-puppycide
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/29/cop-smiles-after-shooting-dog_n_5235504.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false
Puppycide the documentory https://www.facebook.com/pages/Puppycide-The-Documentary/557471920974012
https://www.facebook.com/JusticeforCandyMiddleton?fref=photo
"Jack booted thugs", huh? Well, I suppose there may be a few police officers who are that way. After all, how many police officers ARE there in this country? A few may have problems as you allude to.
DeleteAre there miscarriages of justice? Certainly. Only an idiot would try to assume our system is perfect.
But it's a Helluva a lot better than a lot of systems.
Besides all that, just exactly what has what you posted have to do with Hillary's speech?
Idiot.
More people die of Diarrhea diseases than from guns. What percentage of gun deaths are perpetrated by Criminals? By Honest citizens? Solution for Diarrhea disease...Tell a pro gun control liberal socialist to take their head out of their 6....Do your homework America, Lemmings have a short shelf life...
DeleteConsidering that Obama never campaigned against guns but his elections caused runs on guns and ammo "'cause he's going take our guns away!" anyway, and the NRA has vilified him regardless of his inaction, Hillary must realize she's damned if she does & damned if she doesn't--so she proceeds with no fear.
ReplyDeleteHillary has NO FEAR. She will squash them like the gnats they are.
DeleteIt is awe-inspiring to see a national politician take a stance, any stance, promoting gun sanity. She's got courage.
ReplyDeleteGood for Hillary!
ReplyDeleteBeaglemom
It's Time We Talk About Guns
ReplyDeleteBy Lt. Col. Robert Bateman
We crossed the line some time ago, it has just taken me a while to get around to the topic. Sadly, that topic is now so brutally evident that I feel shame. Shame that I have not spoken out about before now -- shame for my country, shame that we have come to this point. One story tripped me.
A woman charged with killing a fellow Alabama fan after the end of last weekend's Iron Bowl football game was angry that the victim and others didn't seem upset over the Crimson Tide's loss to archrival Auburn, said the sister of the slain woman.
People, it is time to talk about guns.
My entire adult life has been dedicated to the deliberate management of violence. There are no two ways around that fact. My job, at the end of the day, is about killing. I orchestrate violence.
I am not proud of that fact. Indeed, I am often torn-up by the realization that not only is this my job, but that I am really good at my job. But my profession is about directed violence on behalf of the nation. What is happening inside our country is random and disgusting, and living here in England I am at a complete loss as to how to explain this at all. In 2011 the number of gun deaths in the United States was 10.3 per 100,000 citizens. In 2010 that statistic in the UK was 0.25. And do not even try to tell me that the British are not as inclined to violence or that their culture is so different from ours that this difference makes sense. I can say nothing when my British officers ask me about these things, because it is the law.
And for that, frankly speaking, I am embarrassed by our Supreme Court.
The people who sit on a nation's Supreme Court as supposed to be the wisest among us. They are supposed to be the men and women who understand and speak plainly about the most difficult topics confronting our nation. Our Supreme Court, however, has been failing us, as their actions have been almost the exact opposite of this ideal.
You do not have to read this full Supreme Court ruling, it is a supplemental. I can spell it out for you in ten seconds.
Five of the nine members of the Supreme Court agreed that the part in the Second Amendment which talks about "A Well Regulated Militia, Being Necessary To The Security Of A Free State..." did not matter. In other words, they flunked basic high school history.
The lengths to which Justice Scalia had to go in his attempt to rewrite American history and the English language are as stunning as they are egregious. In essence, what he said about the words written by the Founding Fathers was, "Yeah, they didn't really mean what they said."
You have got to be fking kidding me. Seriously? You spent nearly 4,000 words to deny the historical reality of thirteen words? That, sir, is an embarrassingly damning indictment not just of you, but of an educational system that failed to teach history.
...Which is why, in 1903 Congress passed the Militia Act. Friends, if you have not read it I'll just tell you: As of 1903, the "militia" has been known as the National Guard.
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/bateman-on-guns-120313
Well said, Sir! I have argued that 1903 Militia Act point for a number of years!
DeleteWhy, Oh Why, does the Democratic Party not explain this point frequently and forcefully? There are times when I think we are our own worst enemies, because we weigh the pros and cons forever and the fanatics' certainty of whatever their current fascination dictates surpass our ruminations of right or wrong...
Anonymous1:36 PM
DeleteAwesome article!!! Thank you!!!
Agree! Love IM, I learn so much from Gryph and in the comments! Thanks for the comment!
DeleteIf a black guy fixes all the problems white guys created, thou shalt discredit and investigate him till the end of time.
ReplyDeleteBenghazi 3:16
https://twitter.com/linnyitssn/statuses/463738615642980354
You are right... even if he only fixes some of the problems, it does not matter! He cannot be right! This is madness... and a frightening one!
DeleteO/T
ReplyDeleteTrey Goudy, Deliverance Banjo Boy
Trey Goudy today:
http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/05/meet-trey-gowdy-chairman-of-the-new-benghazi-special-committee/361740/
Trey Goudy as young musician:
http://www.destgulch.com/movies/deliver/deliv01.jpg
BENGHAZI!!!! (Definitely not political.)
ReplyDeletehttp://www.mediaite.com/tv/gowdy-tells-gop-not-to-fundraise-off-benghazi-just-as-gop-fundraises-off-benghazi/
Have NO FEAR Hillary, we Mom's have your back. It makes me sick to think people strap on a gun and then go to Church...
ReplyDeleteHillary Clinton: No Reason To Continue Benghazi Investigations (VIDEO)
ReplyDeleteAs House Republicans prepare to form a select committee to look into the Benghazi attacks of 2012, Hillary Clinton told ABC News she doesn't see a need to continue the investigation.
ABC posted a brief clip of the former secretary of state's interview with Robin Roberts.
ROBIN ROBERTS: On Benghazi, the new investigation. Are you satisfied with the answers and are you content with what you know -- what happened?
HILLARY CLINTON: Absolutely. I mean, of course there are a lot of reasons why, despite all of the hearings, all of the information that's provided, some choose not to be satisfied and choose to continue to move forward. That's their choice. And I do not believe there's any reason for it to continue in this way, but they get to call the shots in the Congress.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hillary-clinton-benghazi-investigations
206 House GOPers Fighting For 7 Seats On The Benghazi Committee
Almost every one of the 230-plus House Republicans is clamoring to be among the seven members placed on the Benghazi select committee.
Multiple Hill reporters tweeted that 206 congressional GOPers had requested a seat on the committee. House leadership aides said Tuesday that the committee would have seven Republicans and five Democrats.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/206-house-republicans-benghazi-committee
Thanks for the heads up, I'll have to tivo it.
DeleteNo one cares about the Quitter. Seriously.
ReplyDeleteVanity Fair Responds to Cheney Theory That Clintons Were Behind Lewinsky Profile
http://www.mediaite.com/online/vanity-fair-responds-to-cheney-theory-that-clintons-were-behind-lewinsky-profile/
Sarah's buddy Vlad is putting the screws to Russian citizens, and he THANKS SNOWDEN! Whistleblower my ass, more like a treasonous fuck.
ReplyDelete...Meanwhile, in Edward Snowden’s home away from home, President Vladimir Putin is continuing to tighten his autocratic control over the Internet with a new “bloggers law” that requires Internet site owners and bloggers to register with the government, and requires any organizations and companies that host these sites to keep records (that must be stored in Russia) for at least 6 months of everything they publish.
For good measure, Putin also signed a law that criminalizes profanity with heavy fines for using “vulgarities” in TV, movies, books or plays.
The New York Times reports that Putin gave a speech in St. Petersburg at the end of April in which he signaled the start of the crackdown by thanking Edward Snowden for bringing his attention to this important issue.
“You know that it all began initially, when the Internet first appeared, as a special C.I.A. project,” he said in remarks broadcast live nationally, before adding that “special services are still at the center of things.” He specifically thanked Edward J. Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor granted asylum in Russia, for revealing to the world how efficient the N.S.A. was at collecting information.
Mr. Putin went on to say that someone writing online whose opinion affects thousands or even hundreds of thousands of people should be considered a media outlet. He said he was not talking about a ban, only acting “the way it is done all over the world.”
Glenn Greenwald’s excuse for never saying anything about this subject is that it’s not his beat. He’s focused on other things. How dare you question him, you drooling subservient Obamabot?
Maybe it’s just me, but this issue seems to impinge directly on everything Glenn Greenwald has been writing and speaking and ranting about for years — free speech, civil liberties, surveillance, blogging — and it also directly involves Edward Snowden, the man responsible for his newfound adulation and fame … and he can’t find time to write a single word about it?
Seems odd.
Read more at http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/43365_Putin_Signs_Law_to_Restrict_and_Monitor_Bloggers_Thanks_Edward_Snowden_for_Inspiring_It#b5O0hlLBIGqRtFKF.99
As an Armed Liberal, I have to say I agree with everything Hillary said. It is enough that you are free to defend your home from invasion. The idea that you should be free to walk around anywhere and everywhere with iron strapped on is absurd. I don't want a world where I HAVE to wear an AR in order to feel equal going outside into a world filled with paranoid, arrogant dipshits wearing ARs. In fact, I pay taxes in part to ensure I DO NOT live in that world.
ReplyDeleteFor some reason this article took me right back to an encounter I had at my last job as a manager at a redneck-y but family oriented establishment. A patron had come in wearing a giant Magnum on his hip which caused some amount of concern amongst other patrons who had brought their families. "Surprisingly", the sight of an armed white guy did NOT instill a sense of safety in the other patrons. This prompted management to post "no guns" signs.
Soon after, I had a patron come up to me to announce his displeasure at our new "liberal" code. He said something about how we were making our patrons less safe because now "bad guys" knew they could come in unopposed.
I'll never forget the look on his face when I pointed out that nobody ever said the signs applied to EMPLOYEES. And flashed him an evil grin.
I can say with complete confidence that I've managed to reach nearly 50 years old without ever ONCE feeling the need to draw a weapon on another human being in order to be safe.
But I DO enjoy target shooting, and it's nice to know that when I go to sleep at night, in the event that I wake up to some form of craziness going down, I have options.
Not that I think I will EVER need them, but still, it's nice.
Please tell us about your plan to have a friend remove your weapon(s) at the first sign of mental instability, dementia, Alzheimer's etc, or unexpected reaction to medications or physical trauma that affect your mental/physical ability to safely control a firearm.
DeleteAs a responsible gun owner you should be happy to share your plan to STOP owning a gun in the event you are no longer "responsible".
And, of course, you must be absolutely confident that every gun owner that ever comes near you has such a plan. Would that I lived in such a world.
Well, I hope you never have a depressed relative, or an angry spouse, or a major illness that causes you depression. My husband is going through some tough times, and I thank God that we do not have a gun in the house. That and we have grandkids, and I want them safe, not dead.
Delete@5:08 and 5:51
DeleteExcuse me, but he never said anything about there being an actual plan to have armed employees. He merely said he TOLD the man that.
And, having read through his comment a couple of times, I find that not once did he say anything about his safety features at home or anything remotely like that when it comes to his family's security due to the weapons.
From what I can tell, his very first paragraph says everything he was trying to say - in support of Hillary.
The rest of your commenting is based on your own fears and doubts. It sounds to me as though you are the complete removal of firearms types, which ain't gonna happen while you're alive.
I am sorry you are having medical problems, but trying to use them against this guy is just not right.
@3:45AM
DeleteYes, you are right. The original commenter did not claim to be a responsible gun owner. A responsible gun owner ALWAYS recognizes that they must plan for the situation when they can no longer safely handle a firearm.
The comment claims the person is "armed". Without any statement of being a fully responsible gun owner, tales of how guns enrich lives are worthless (and usually untrue).
I have absolutely no medical problems. I DID remove a pistol and other firearms from my father's home shortly before the official diagnosis of dementia.
People that comment about their guns are just going to be stuck having to skip over my comments about how UNresponsible they appear to be in the area of gun ownership. After all, if they have a GUN, they must be TOUGH enough to handle a little gentle education on responsibility.
Or maybe they aren't so tough and need a whining complainer to make up "fears and doubts", of which I have have absolutely NONE.
Hillary's spot on with this one, especially the off balance part.
ReplyDeleteI learned of a case in which a husband acquired a gun to kill his wife. He shot her three times but she lived. He was in Anger Management classes! He plotted her murder for two months!
ReplyDeleteAfter he thought she was dead he shot himself. It will be interesting to learn how he obtained the gun. He killed her because she filed for divorce.
Your example is exactly what Hillary was talking about!
DeleteIs it unreasonable to have enough control applied that as soon as someone demonstrates mental problems, any and all weapons need to be removed from their access? I think not. And I believe that is the gist of what she is trying to say. We need better information about a person before they are allowed to purchase a firearm. ANY firearm!
I agree with the Hillary Clinton. It is not wrong to carry a gun but guns should not be in hands of wrong people.
ReplyDeleteSounds like she isn't going to run.
ReplyDelete