Will Clinton Try To Take Everyone's Guns Away If She Becomes President?

Submitted by: 5cats 1 year ago in News & Politics
hill-clinton-takes-guns

Some I-A-B members have, in the past, claimed Hillary would never go after people's 2nd Amendment Rights, yet she has been planning to do so for years now.

This video of Russ Feingold, a highly visible Democrat, was taken at a fundraiser for his campaign hosted by a wealthy Clinton supporter, Amy Rao. Without hesitation they both eagerly say that Hillary would take peoples guns away by any means necessary.

In the leaked e-mails, with many more e-mails to come, there's also plans to 'work around' the Constitution and grab people's guns. Strip law-abiding US Citizens of their rights.

Since Lawfully (under the US Constitution) changing the rule would be impossible for her, the majority of people and politicians support it, she'll need to use devious methods. Presidential orders, using various government arms to ban, restrict and confiscate. Count on it!

There are 59 comments:
Male 1,412
the AG in Massacuessets, recently, edicted that all semiauto guns "based on an ar15 semiauto action" were banned.  And such gun sales were immediately halted, and the owners prohibited from transfering them.  Illegal you say?  who knows, it will be in the courts for years. but i see this as the blueprint for clinton.  Gets in, bans everyhing but bolt action rifles, and lets the courts sort it all out.  And exactly who will be appointing new members to the supreme court? Our country, and our freedoms, are hanging like the sword of damocles over our heads...VOTE TRUMP
0
Reply
Male 1,627
honestly, Obama and Hillary put more guns on the street then thing else. every time they open their mouth gun shops sell out
0
Reply
Male 1,627
what a nightmare we live in
0
Reply
Male 3,391
cut and paste this intelligent argument and sent it into space.
0
Reply
Male 1,308
And we wonder why we can't find signs of life outside of our planet: they are hiding from us. Let's pray for their sake we never find them.
0
Reply
Male 7,913
Hillary is coming for you guns just like Obama came for your guns....oh wait.
0
Reply
Male 252
""President Barack Obama has admitted that his failure to pass "common sense gun safety laws" in the US is the greatest frustration of his presidency."" You're right, he never really wanted to take away guns. Just use common sense. Like in health care, that's working really really awesome at the moment. Let's let government run more things
0
Reply
Male 2,216
I am a Liberal, my weapons are all Democrats. They don't care where you're from, what color you are or if you are gay.
0
Reply
Male 7,913
Holy crap. By the way you have to be careful on some of these "leaked" e-mails now. There's been e-mail spoofing so some of these are in fact faked. Since people that were communicating are using PUBLIC e-mail accounts like Gmail, yahoo etc, you can spoof the crap out of those and it's been done. So now we have even more disinformation.
0
Reply
2,831
"gun show loophole". God I love that term. When you hear it you instantly know the person you are talking to knows fuck all about firearm legislation. This isnt a loophole and doesnt apply to gun shows. It was explicitly written in to the brady bill that any private party sale in the same state does not have to go through a FFL (which are required to do checks and most of the people selling guns at a gun show are FFL's!) and that all came from the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 which said it was illegal for the government to keep a registry of firearms. Private sales = no registry. Agree, disagree I dont care, but it's not a fucking loophole.
0
Reply
Female 4,405
And if you think a dealer is going to risk his business at a gun show by selling to someone without conducting the required background checks already in place? http://www.infowars.com/undercover-video-comedian-debunks-gun-show-loophole/
0
Reply
Male 40,734
The grabbers and other assorted IAB liberals have nothing else. So they use deliberately false information to spread their propaganda and lies. Sad isn't it? Ancient Greeks with assault rifles... lolz!
0
Reply
Male 1,733
@Nicod3mus ouch. You cut me deep. That's because I really do care about someone's opinion of me that has never met me....Please tell me more of what you think of me. I'll be over here not giving a fuck.
0
Reply
Male 252
@oobaka I was stating a fact nothing more. If you were offended by it, that is your problem. Oh wait you went out of your way to say you didn't care. Hilarious
0
Reply
Male 40,734
Welcome to MY world: so many IAB Liberals have become nothing but stalkers now. Spamming the boards with their off-topic hate, personal attacks and deliberate lies. Why? Because my politics offends them. They freely admit this is the reason, although some have euphemisms for it. >>> But nice of you to change the subject and ignore how stupid you were! LMAO! Ancient Greeks loved their guns... what an ignorant cunt!
0
Reply
Female 400
"Will Clinton Try To Take Everyone’s Guns Away If She Becomes President?" Fingers crossed.
0
Reply
Female 400
I'll grab the AK-47 that I conveniently keep loaded and with me at all times (my daughter occasionally plays with it and accidentally shot my mother with it, but it's a small price to pay against the miniscule possibility that I might get attacked by armed men), then I would use the couch for cover (I keep it strategically placed for this eventuality), and start spraying bullets round. I imagine in that sort of gun battle, conducted by panicking amateurs, a lot of people are going to get shot, and seeing as there are 3 of them and one of me, and they've got the jump on me, most of the victims are going to be my family. But that's OK, because with a loaded gun in the house, they were probably going to get shot at some point anyway.
0
Reply
Male 40,734
In FACT the sight of a firearm is often enough to send criminals fleeing in abject terror. These are not brave men (or women) who are willing to die for their crimes, they are cowards looking for EASY money. Most 'lawful gun defence' doesn't involve a shot being fired, this is a fact. Take a shot at them (a warning shot is not wise or required by any law) and they will most likely run. 'Wild West' shoot-outs are extremely rare, even back in the Wild West! >>> How is having a gun 'not better' than being defenceless in this situation? You honestly think you would hit your own children by shooting at some home invaders? How feeble are you? You honestly this that if you didn't resist they'd not harm you in any way? How ignorant are you? They threw morality and decency out the window when they kicked in your door. Theft is the least of your worries. Rape, torture and murder can and frequently DO happen during home invasions. You prefer to just sit there and watch your children get raped? You demand others be forced to do the same because YOU are afraid of guns? Honest questions, all of them.
0
Reply
Female 400
@5Cats - where's your gun when your house gets invaded? Is it to hand? Lying on the coffee table, loaded and ready to go? And, by the way, you're correct about accidental shootings. For the latest year I could find figures for, "only" about 600 people were accidentally killed by guns in the US. Let's put that into perspective for a moment. That's nearly two a day. I'll say it again. On average, nearly two people every day die in the US from accidental shootings. Let's compare that with, say, the number of people killed in the US by terrorists. Between 2004 and 2013 - that's 9 years - 36 people were killed by terrorists in the US. So why do people like you get hysterical about the threat of terrorists, but not the threat of accidental shootings? Anyway, that's a digression. Obviously, you're right about people defending themselves with guns. While there were only 600 accidental deaths from firearms in 2011, there were an impressive 11,000 gun homicides. In one year. That's 30 people every day being murdered with a gun. I can't deny it any longer. You're right. Guns are great! You need more of them.
0
Reply
Male 40,734
And you've answered your own question too Cribbens: Culture! I said it here: drugs gangs culture causes half the gun violence in the USA from 5% of the population (max). If you had race-based gangs running through the streets of your biggest cities? You'd have the same overall numbers as the USA. Take the gangs gun violence out and the USA is equal or lower than many EU nations. >>> I posted an article on knife buying in UK, one of our members said 'bullocks' then went to buy a knife and asked the sales clerk... she apologized. ;-) IDK if it has changed since then, but you have to be over 18, so ID is required, just like for booze or smokes, that's a restriction, period. >>> UK guns crimes: DID NOT FALL Unless the Home Office and BBC are lying to you? They SHOT UP ok? While, at the exact same time in America? Gun ownership rose rapidly and gun crimes DROPPED across the board. So tell me again how less guns means less crimes, when reality says otherwise. >>> In theory if it worked I'd support it, duh. Magical? That is correct: it is magical thinking and nothing to do with the real world. It has NEVER worked that way (except in tiny Fiji) and in FACT has simply disarmed honest people and told the criminals it was open season... >>> More guns does NOT mean more violence, and less guns does NOT mean less: Any Quick Look Will Confirm This there's a lot more to it than that simplistic view: that's a fact.
0
Reply
Female 400
@MelCervini - The fantastic thing is that I don't need to answer your question. I don't live in the US so armed men aren't going to burst into my house and rape my family. I don't need to cower in my home, one eye on my gun cabinet, jumping at shadows and thinking 'what was that noise?' I don't need to walk down the street with a loaded gun because of the risk that some random stranger is going to shoot me. I live in a civilised country.
0
Reply
Female 400
Still can't reply :( @5Cats - I don't know where you're getting your information, but that stuff about the knives is nonsense. I've lived my entire life in the UK and it's just plain wrong. As is the fact that gun crime went up. I've corrected you on this before but you seem to have overlooked it. In fact, the numbers have been falling consistently and significantly (apart from one year when there was a minor blip) for over a decade, not just for gun crime but for all murders (there were about half the murders in 2015 as there were in 2005, for example). So the argument that strict gun laws doesn't mean lower gun crime is fundamentally and completely wrong. You need to acknowledge that. And the fact that you call the UK gun laws 'draconian' is interesting, given the number of lives that they save. I'd be interested in your thoughts on a hypothetical question. The UK has strict gun laws, and because of this the number of gun deaths in the UK is negligible (if the UK had the same population as the US it would be 250 deaths per year. Currently the US has 11,000 per year). So here's my question: if you could magically disappear all the guns overnight in the country and reduce the gun crime by 5000%, would you?
0
Reply
Female 4,405
And still haven't answered the simplest little question. I HOPE you're never faced with that situation, but as for my living in fear? LOL! not at all.. I sleep like a baby at night and feel perfectly 100% safe in my home and outside because I carry my firearm with me. Its not about 'good areas' or 'bad areas', and its NOT about the evil gun.... its about BAD PEOPLE who can go where they want, when they want because laws dont apply to them. Stay safe by whatever means you choose, but stay safe.
0
Reply
Male 40,734
Yeah, there's some peculiar IAB reply issues, like sometimes it seems like your reply didn't go through? Just hit Refresh and almost always it shows up for you then. :-) 1. How any of your proposals, or those of gun grabbers, would lower anything at all. You went off on some bizarre tangent about terrorists. 2. Yes, knives over (iirc) 2 inches are 'restricted' and (again, iirc) ID must be shown and paperwork filled out to purchase a common kitchen knife. That is the law, the government allows you to buy one IF you qualify. It's UK? Or just England? Not that it matters much. 3. Not one of the 'gun grabbers' policies would take one gun away from one criminal. In UK and Australia? Gun crime shot UP in the years after their harsh laws were passed. Now there are actually more lawful gun owners in both nations than before the laws!! Why? because people WANT to lawfully own a gun. So did their draconian laws: lower crime? no; raised it. Lower gun ownership? For a few years, now it is higher than before. There is NO correlation in the USA between harsh gun laws and low gun crime/murder. In fact often then opposite: low laws with low gun violence (which makes some sense when you think about it, but I doubt you've thought about it at all given your replies so far. All emotions, no brains.). Gun crime has NEVER dropped because of harsh laws in the USA or anywhere else (except Fiji! Lolz!), or we'd have heard about it from every MSM talking head in America by now. 4. What's 'childish' is imagining laws can stop gun violence. What's idiotic is imagining guns can be taken away from criminals. They are ALREADY not supposed to have them, how would more laws be any different? The argument that removing LEGAL guns will somehow make ILLEGAL ones vanish is just pure and utter bullshit. A deliberate lie, the opposite of reality. 5. If YOU don't want a gun in your house? NO ONE is stopping you! But why should YOU tell OTHERS what they are 'allowed' to do? Why can your fear over-rule their RIGHTS? That's just plain wrong.
0
Reply
Female 400
Stupid web page won't let me reply, so I'm doing it here. @5Cats - 1. Changing the subject how? I was directly responding to your request for stats on firearm accidents. 2. Do you genuinely believe that people in the UK need to get permission from the government to buy a kitchen knife? 3. Of course I understand that illegal guns are a problem. So why make it easier for criminals to get hold of guns? And if, as has been shown, gun crime falls in areas with fewer legal guns, why do you insist on blaming only illegal guns for all the problems? 4. Guns are OK just because guns aren't the only thing that can kill you is a childish argument. It's also a contradictory argument. If you think it's ridiculous that knives aren't banned, why don't you think it ridiculous that missile batteries are? @MelCervini - Coffee kills 8 people a day? Really? That sounds suspiciously like a study by Professor Maybe from the University of Yeah, Probably. But, for the moment, let's just say you're right. So what? Because coffee kills people it's OK for guns to kill people? That seems like a desperate argument. BTW, the stats I quoted didn't include suicide by gun. If you include that, the number rises to about 31,000. Every year. Although you're right, I assume it does include gang violence. I didn't realise we were only allowed to include murders by certain types of people. I imagine if you limit it to white middle class grandparents, the numbers look even better. You should do that. @ Both of you - either way, this whole debate just makes me grateful I don't live in Colombia or Syria, or wherever it is you live, constantly and desperately afraid that at any moment a gang of armed men are going to burst into my house and rape my family. The fact that you actually seem to expect that to happen and are afraid to be more than three feet away from a loaded gun at any time just highlights how your lives must be ruled by fear. Sounds like a god-awful place to live to me.
0
Reply
Female 4,405
On average, COFFEE kills 8 people a day... I'll say it again... on average eight people every day die...from drinking coffee. Doctors kill more people than guns and cars COMBINED. btw your shooting stats include gang violence and suicides (which alone makes up for 60% of gun deaths)... remove your gang-ridden cities from the equation and the numbers plummet, but that doesn't fit the 'evil scary guns' narrative,does it.
0
Reply
Male 40,734
Why are you changing the subject? Why aren't you aware of or acknowledging the 1.5 to 3 million crimes prevented by lawful gun owners every year? 600 > 3 million? Why not bring cars into it? Or swimming pools? Or knives? We should restrict knives like UK does? Require government permission to buy an ordinary kitchen knife?? Let's just ignore everything that doesn't fit your pre-determined reality, disregardless of facts. Accidents happen. Ladders and deer kill a lot of people, yet we don't outlaw either of those, correct? ILLEGAL GUNS are often used in those accidents you mention, you do know that eh? They are all lumped together in most stats. Same for your homicide numbers, making guns illegal won't stop the deaths from already illegal guns, you DO know that? Do you imagine the number will magically drop to zero if only there were enough LAWS? How about making murder illegal, you think that might help too? Naw! That's just crazy talk, eh? >>> No law on Earth will stop criminals from having those illegal guns, this is a fact, correct? And only the lawful citizens will obey 'gun laws' and disarm: and the will be defenceless. And the armed criminals will know this, can you predict what will happen next? Peace and tranquility of course! Liberal Utopia! Right?
0
Reply
Male 40,734
Well, you are criminally (Cribbensally?) stupid for leaving a loaded firearm where children can easily access it, so your DNA needs to be removed from the gene pool. >>> Show me the stats: how many children are accidentally killed each year by firearms? Not many, pools are far more dangerous, especially when you consider how few pools there are compared to guns! It has been on IAB before, no one disputed the facts, just screamed emotionally how bad guns were. It was a typical liberal response, rather like yours. All emotion, no facts allowed. >>> In fact more children are deliberately killed by guns, or 'accidentally' during some other crime like a drive-by shooting. You don't get it, do you, that the MSM has been feeding you lies for decades now, trying to push their anti-gun agenda on you. They rarely report 'gun saves family' stories even though that happens FAR more often, but never fail to report an accident, no matter how few times that occurs.
0
Reply
Female 4,405
scenario: You're at home alone watching tv and 3 men with guns kick your door in. (because as we all know, criminals dont care about banned gun laws) what are you going to do to protect yourself and your family?
0
Reply
Female 400
I'll grab the AK-47 that I conveniently keep loaded and with me at all times (my daughter occasionally plays with it and accidentally shot my mother with it, but it's a small price to pay against the miniscule possibility that I might get attacked by armed men), then I would use the couch for cover (I keep it strategically placed for this eventuality), and start spraying bullets round. I imagine in that sort of gun battle, conducted by panicking amateurs, a lot of people are going to get shot, and seeing as there are 3 of them and one of me, and they've got the jump on me, most of the victims are going to be my family. But that's OK, because with a loaded gun in the house, they were probably going to get shot at some point anyway. @MelCervini, @5Cats - what do you think would happen?
0
Reply
Female 4,405
okay.. so that's what would happen at YOUR house. Sorry you couldn't even give an honest answer to a legit question.
0
Reply
Female 4,405
How on earth is that a ridiculous question? Do you think that's never happened before or something? :B That's exactly what I'm telling you.. or better yet, how about some examples? action starts about 3:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhJh4dbEVA8 or this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPRJlfkQZcY. MY home has 5 adults currently and 2 children, so my firearms are secured, but throughout the home in bedrooms and near exits. We train, we target shoot as often as we can and we're diverse with different calibers. I'm an instructor so everyone here is locked on. We call 911, but by the time they got here, all they'd be doing is paperwork. I'm NOT waiting the 10-20 minutes it takes to clear and secure MY home from an intruder and I'm DAMN sure not going to run away, NOR am I going to hide. 1) my door is kicked in the dogs will sound the alarm and begin their jobs of protection while I grab either my .45 semi-automatic or .357 magnum from their hiding places that are indeed within reach, (unless its downstairs, then I'll either use the AR-15 or the Yugo SKS and do my best to eliminate the threats while the rest of my family comes with THEIR guns (unless I'm solo, then hopefully I'll be on my game) I have every confidence that with my expertise, training and practice I can keep my family and myself safe. I will NOT 'shoot to wound", they came in with intent to harm, they're leaving in body bags... or evidence bags. Ignorance can always be corrected so I can't suggest highly enough that you do some reading or research for yourself and see how taking care of yourself and not relying on others for your protection isn't "stupid". It MIGHT save you or a loved one from being raped or murdered. So, I'll ask my very serious question again... what will you do?
0
Reply
Female 400
@MelCervini Are you telling me it would be any different at any gun owner's house? How exactly is owning a gun going to protect you in that situation? I didn't give a serious answer because it's a ridiculous question. Any suggestion that a gun would be any help to you at all in that situation is just stupid. Just because you own a gun do you keep it within reach and loaded at all times? Do you lock it in a gun safe so your children don't shoot themselves with it? Seriously, talk me through the scenario when 3 armed men burst into your home.
0
Reply
Male 40,734
Reason with them? Phone the police? (they'll be there in under half an hour, maybe) Give them Hillary Campaign leaflets? Ask them to rape the children gently?
0
Reply
Male 1,437
Do I smell... yep, it's a 5cats post :P I get that you want to even the playing field since there is so much Anti-Trump stuff, but aren't you Canadian? Why does the US election matter that much to you if so? (If not, my bad, might have confused you with someone else). All I can say though is I'll be glad once the election has taken place and we don't have to see so much election talk for a few months (seriously, you Americans must LOVE your multi-year election "season" lol - we have a few months up here). I still say this election isn't about who is best, but who is less worse.
0
Reply
Female 4,405
why are you attacking the poster on something that has nothing to do with what he posted? And the "what difference does it make" attitude reveals much... This is a very real issue and it doesn't just affect the US... what do you think you little "pilot fish" are going to do when the shit hits the fan? what do you think will happen to Canadians if the US falls? (and if you disarm its populace, Fall it will and hard) "The supreme court is wrong about the 2nd amendment and I am going to make that case every chance I get" - H. Clinton. that pretty much sums up where she stands out of her own mouth.
0
Reply
Male 1,437
wasn't meant as an attack. I was genuinely curious as to why he puts so much effort into the anti-clinton and pro-trump posts, especially since we can't do anything about it anyway as non-Americans. Perhaps poorly worded in terms of "why does it matter" as yes, I am aware how other countries' leaders can affect everything between nations. As for the issue itself and the guns - Should responsible people be allowed to own guns? sure, why not? If it requires a bit more scrutiny to obtain one, not a big deal. Though if they were literally to try and ban/take them all away, the government would rightfully deserve the fallout.
0
Reply
Male 40,734
Oh, glad to hear that, thanks for clarifying. That 'question' is OFTEN thrown at me by lefty-libs with nothing else to attack and no way to defend their position. I've hated Hillary since her days as a censorship advocate in the early 80's. Everything she's done since then has only further proven what a vile excuse she really is. And how the IAB liberals and the MSM can sell their souls to worship her? I have no idea. >>>Once their guns are gone, and criminals run the show? No one will be overturning anything: it will be Stalin's USSR repeated in America, complete with millions murdered by the Government and enforced mass starvation...
0
Reply
Male 4,894
Hey, a knowledge of history is all to the good. At the same time, I don't think we're on the verge of "enforced mass starvation" just yet. Maybe next week.
0
Reply
Male 40,734
Stalin didn't do that? Nor Turkey, Hitler, the British, the Belgians, the Japanese, Chairman Mao, Pol Pot... none of them did? SHM... I'm sure I left many out, and history WILL repeat itself for those who pretend the past never existed.
0
Reply
Male 4,894
LOL. I'm sorry, 5Cats, but the end of that comment of yours really made me laugh. You've entered Alex Jones's territory. "Millions murdered by the gubmint and enforced mass starvation!"  AUUUGGGH!  ~Squrlz runs about frantically, clutching his pearls~
0
Reply
Male 40,734
Thanks MelCervini! It's shocking how some IAB Liberals just don't get it: Canada and USA are closely knit! Anything that happens in America WILL AFFECT US, usually immediately. And these same lefty-libs have NO trouble constantly bitching about the leaders and governments of other nations, eh? Once again the double standard is so obvious it's painful...
0
Reply
Male 40,734
korhan is a Canadian too, but the same principle applies: he surely comments about other nations' governments or leaders here on IAB, or in general. And he knows just how bad and boring Canadian politics is! Zomg! Our votes literally mean nothing.
0
Reply
Male 40,734
You left out: spend billions wastefully, deliver a deficit 3x as big as promised, and impose massive taxes on the poor, eh? From Prince Justin's resume thus far... and it will get much worse, that's one certainty in Canadian politics! Tax the poor and give to the rich: the Liberal Party mantra!
0
Reply
Male 1,437
Yeah, I comment but am nowhere near as invested in the farce of American politics as you seem to be. But you're right in that our politics are a lot more boring, at least the US politics make for good comedy fodder. Worst thing Trudeau has done was bumped into a tit. Also, I don't identify as either a liberal or conservative. They both have good and idiotic points. It's just stupid that it always boils down to 2 parties/people, ignoring all the others who might do a better job overall if given the chance.
0
Reply
Male 1,736
Closing loopholes, enforcing current laws on background checks, and strengthening current laws on background checks is a whole heck of a lot different than "taking guns away."
0
Reply
Male 40,734
Those are nothing at all like what the Democrats mean when they say 'common sense gun reform' and you should know that by now. It has been on IAB a couple of times... BTW: the 'background checks' they seek are nothing but a thinly veiled reason for mass confiscation. They've already tried exactly that in various blue states... but were shot down by the Courts, rightfully so, as unconstitutional.
0
Reply
Male 6,077
It looks to me like you're way overcalling what this is saying. First of all, and it really may not make a difference, this is what her supporters, not she, are saying she'll do. Second, even they aren't saying she's going to take away all guns. What they're saying is that she'll impose more control by restricting high volume sales of bullets and closing loopholes in gun sale background checks for gun show and internet sales. What they are absolutely NOT saying is that "Hillary would take peoples guns away by any means necessary." I agree that there are way too many handguns around and I really don't get why people feel the need to have so-called assault weapons. I think a lot of lives would be safer without them. The problem is that after decades of the pro-gun lobby stupidly fighting ANY kind of control at all, we now have so many weapons in this country that I don't think it's really possible to get control. I think we'd be much safer today if those assholes had helped to make sensible laws so that people could enjoy gun ownership without so many others being afraid.
0
Reply
Male 40,734
She herself has said she would on several occasions. Just because the MSM refuses to cover it, and YouTube deletes, doesn't mean it never happened. And so have many high-ranking Democrats. You think these same Dems would support someone willing to defend the 2nd? HA! >>> Jesus man, actual assault weapons are so rarely used in crimes it's astonishing. What IS used are pistols, but the Grabbers know that's what people overwhelmingly used for self-defence as well, and would be the last gun they'd want taken away. So they (get this!) LIE and claim 'assault rifles' are the #1 problem in the USA and MUST BE regulated, banned and then confiscated. It sounds so easy, but like the break in the dyke, the flood never stops. This has been public knowledge for decades, why are you so willing to PRETEND Hillary will defend the 2nd Amendment when her PARTY wants it gone?
0
Reply
Male 40,734
Only a fraction of the Podesta e-mails have been released, there's much more to come! >>> Small wonder Hillary and her entire team wanted no one to ever find out what they were saying to each other (even though the law required her to provide every single e-mail to the Public Archives of the DOS) and went to such extreme (and illegal) measures to hide them. When the records of just one of Hillary's many advisors and underlings is revealed? The picture is ugly indeed. >>> Working with the MSM to help cover-up her Benghazi problems, plans to ignore the law and how to get away with it, her many health issues. All things the American Public deserves to know before the election.
0
Reply
Male 40,734
Oh, it was in one of the released e-mails, I attached a link to one of my submissions, but there were 3-4 lately, lolz! Anyhow, the Hillary Team has been trying to find ways to get rid of legal guns, and they do nothing without Hillary's express instructions.
0
Reply
Male 252
molṑn labé
0
Reply
Male 40,734
'Come and take them' Unfortunately? That's exactly what Hillary and her fellow gun-grabbing Democrats will do. Are doing, and have been doing for decades now.
0
Reply
Male 1,733
They've been grabbing guns for decades? WHAT IN THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ???? You have to be a moron to believe the words you're typing. If Democrats are grabbing guns, they're not doing a very good job. Gun manufacturing and importing are at all time highs. The average gun owner has 8 guns. The top few percent of gun owners have 25 guns. There are more guns in the USA than fucking people. And you want to believe they're taking people's guns? You're a fucking blithering idiot.
0
Reply
Male 40,734
You are an insufferable cunt oobaka! Thanks for confirming that. >>>In ancient Greece, the invading Persians invited King Leonidas's army to lay down their spears and they would walk away unharmed. He invited them to 'come get them' meaning the spears, which were the 'assault rifles' of the time, yes? Ghod, having to explain the obvious to liberals, how boring! It's on Wiki you blithering fucktard. >>> Since the 'Assault Rifle Ban' of the 80's, and even long before then dude! Is that enough 'decades' for you? Feinstein (for one example of dozens) has been saying she'll take every gun away from everyone, except the rich of course, for that long. TRYING TO can you not even read?
0
Reply
Male 252
You don't understand the reference
0
Reply
Male 40,734
'When they pry them from my cold, dead hands' ? Yours is from ancient Greece of course, isn't that referring to daring the government to come and try to take your guns away? That's my understanding.
0
Reply
Male 252
@oobaka I would call you an insufferable;e cunt but that would be insulting to cunts everywhere.
0
Reply
Male 1,733
Oh...and that's what ancient Greece was known for. Their love of guns.
0
Reply