JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
17,471
Reactions
36,483
<broken link removed>

Instapundit » Blog Archive » FACT-CHECKING THE "FACT-CHECKERS," AGAIN: NRA says Clinton said something she said. Politifact says…

" Fiske argues that Clinton "focused her comments on voluntary buyback programs similar to those some U.S. communities have instituted for guns and the federal 'cash-for-clunkers' program."

That's demonstrably false. Clinton clearly said "the Australian example is worth considering."

And that "Australian example" was an example of gun confiscation. It was not a voluntary program. Historian Varad Mehta wrote about the Australian program last year for the Federalist, breaking down exactly what it entailed."





NRA weakly claims that Clinton said gun confiscation is 'worth considering'
" NRA weakly claims that Clinton said gun confiscation is 'worth considering'
By Warren Fiske on Monday, October 17th, 2016 at 12:02 a.m."
 
Then there's this:

Unknowingly caught on tape, Clinton supporter and former Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold said "there might be executive orders" if a President Hillary Clinton cannot get gun control measures through bipartisan opposition in Congress.

"If we can't get it done the right way, then we'll impede...or hinder your right to bear arms...[and] your right to buy arms," he said of the alleged Clinton plan.

Feingold is currently running for his former role, against Republican Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.).

Hmmm, what part of "shall not be infringed" do they not understand. Too lazy to read the dictionary I guess.
 
Then there's this:

Unknowingly caught on tape, Clinton supporter and former Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold said "there might be executive orders" if a President Hillary Clinton cannot get gun control measures through bipartisan opposition in Congress.

"If we can't get it done the right way, then we'll impede...or hinder your right to bear arms...[and] your right to buy arms," he said of the alleged Clinton plan.

Feingold is currently running for his former role, against Republican Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.).

Hmmm, what part of "shall not be infringed" do they not understand. Too lazy to read the dictionary I guess.
This has long been the plan. There won't be an outright confiscation, but rather incremental regulation and taxing until it is no longer financially feasible for the populace to cling to their guns...

Then we will be left with hammers and bibles to cling to...
 
Yes well, I don't buy ammo, with the exception of .22lr, since I am a reloader. I do have many many lbs of powder and boxes of bulletos for my pistolas and rifles tho.:)
 
Hmmm, what part of "shall not be infringed" do they not understand. Too lazy to read the dictionary I guess.

Unfortunately, they understand but just don't care what the constitution says. They want to ban guns in private ownership, and they are determined to have their way, one way or the other. If they can't ban private ownership outright, then they will continue to do it incrementally.

IMO, it's actually a good thing when guys like Feingold spell out their position so clearly, as it blows the smoke away from the smokescreen others are trying to lay down.
 
IMO, it's actually a good thing when guys like Feingold spell out their position so clearly, as it blows the smoke away from the smokescreen others are trying to lay down.

That might be true if anyone gave a ratsa$$. At this point "what difference does it make"?
 
It's funny (not really) that no matter what she does, she didn't intend to do what she did, and that makes it ok, and no matter what she says, she didn't really say what she said.o_O

She's like the Teflon don
 

Upcoming Events

Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA
Klamath Falls gun show
Klamath Falls, OR
Oregon Arms Collectors April 2024 Gun Show
Portland, OR
Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top