Hillary Clinton says guns should be outlawed. We disagree. When I say “we”, I mean all of us. Gallop took a poll this month. They asked “Do you think there should a law that bans the possession of handguns..” We said no, and we said it in a big way. By more than a three to one ratio, 23 percent to 76 percent, we rejected the idea of a handgun ban. That is the strongest response the poll has ever recorded. You were not told that public opinion changed. That is interesting too.
The poll also asked about modern rifles. Gallop asked, “Are you for or against a law which would make it illegal to manufacture, sell, or possess semi-automatic guns known as assault rifles?” 61 percent of us said they didn’t want an assault weapons ban, while only 36 said they wanted it. The number of people asking for such a ban is again the lowest, and the number against such a ban is again the highest, since the poll has been run. That is another record setting shift in public opinion. We set a record but didn’t hear about it.
Note what Clinton’s unpopular gun control plans won’t do. They won’t disarm one criminal.
I noticed that we didn’t about our opinion from the mainstream media. Ask yourself how the media would behave if the poll results were reversed. Of course they would cover the story if gun control were popular. That story would have been covered by every publicly traded news network.
Instead, the poll showed that we reject government control of firearms. That little secret would make Hillary Clinton’s gun control position seem unpopular. That is bad news a few weeks before an election.
Why does this poll matter? The anti-rights media would like to us to think we are alone. They want each of us to think that we are the only person who recognizes the right of armed self-defense. We are not alone. Firearms ownership is popular with the vast majority of adults in the United States. That isn’t about hunting.
There is more to the story. Listen carefully to how the poll question was worded “Do you think there should be a law that would ban the possession of handguns except by the police and other authorized persons?” I think that is a skewed question.
The question makes important assumptions. “Passing a gun ban” makes it sound like you’ve actually changed reality. Check your history books, but no government has, or could, stop criminals from getting weapons. Yes, you can make guns illegal for law abiding people to own, but that doesn’t disarm a single thug. “Passing a gun ban” makes it sound like guns actually disappeared. They don’t disappear at all.. except from the hands of law abiding people like you and me.
I wonder what the results would be if you asked different poll questions. How about asking this.
The results would embarrass our politicians. You can count on it.
Part One reported how President Clinton disarmed the US. This is what happened after she did it.
The news/entertainment media was torn in two directions. The mainstream journalists wanted to run the murder stories, the recent stories of violent attacks. If it bleeds it leads, and those were exactly the sort of stories that riveted viewers and boosted their network ratings. Besides, the public had a need to know. On the other hand, the publicly traded media corporations couldn’t run those stories any more. They couldn’t report the surge in violent crime that happened after America was disarmed. The reasons were simple.
President Clinton told us that crime would go down once she disarmed honest gun owners. Police sources privately told the reporters that crime was surging. It turns out that disarming honest people only made it easier for criminals. The publicly traded media couldn’t say that, not if they wanted to stay in business and avoid a plague of federal lawyers descending on them like locusts. The big media outlets couldn’t report the news of violent crime, but the new media could. They did.
Blogs and online news sources reported a surge of criminal breakins in the suburbs. There was a huge surge in firearms theft. House after house was robbed by armed thugs in blue city after blue city. It was as if the local gangs had a list of gun owners and knew right where to go. The thugs seemed to know which households still had guns.. and how many guns they had.
It turns out that local elections have consequences too.
A mathematically literate professor in Virginia showed that the recent break ins couldn’t have been chance events. Some of the publicly traded media picked up the story until President Clinton’s spokeswoman blamed Russian hackers for the release of government held firearms registration information. The surge of violent break ins was the gun owner’s fault for having guns that thugs wanted. Well that explained everything..or did it.
Government lawyers made a few phone calls to their corporate counterparts. The crime stories dried up. The stories were even removed from the network websites.
The crime surge that started in the suburbs didn’t stop there. Violent crime surged in the inner cities as well. Criminals were never a large percentage of the populace, never more than a few percent. That was true in even the most violent and poverty stricken areas of the Democrat controlled deep blue cities. Now the armed thugs were bolder than ever. Knowing where gun owners lived also told the thugs which households were disarmed. Once they’d been given the secret treasure map, the wolves also knew which houses were occupied by sheep.
Some of the honest citizens were more frightened of the thugs than they were of the new public-safety police. These honest citizens got their guns on the black market too. Police narcotics officers ignored drug sales and went trolling for gun buyers with predictable results. The news media heavily reported the arrest of ordinary citizens for gun possession.
Ordinary citizens spent months in jail trying to make bail. In contrast, violent gang members were sprung in a few hours. Statist billionaires provided the bail money and social justice warriors provided judges with the political cover for “equal justice”.
Social scientists were shocked by the new trends. College enrollment dropped and marriages soared.
Rape increased on and around campus as guns were outlawed. Even though college tuition was now free, more women chose to study online from home where they felt safe. People are practical, and women covered up to avoid being a target of sexual predators.
Rape spread through the disarmed housing projects as well as the subburbs. At first, poor women tried to move in with their boyfriends for safety. That didn’t make women safer. A boyfriend might use you for sex, but he won’t take a beating to protect you. A husband would. Poor women got married so that they and their children were protected at night. Muslim clerics praised the new social trend with women obeying their “proper place in society” and staying home. The publicly traded news media blamed patriarchal right wing sexual oppression for women covering up in public.
Both the mainstream media and online sources reported a sudden interest in sports and physical fitness. That was the story they were still allowed to tell. Sporting goods stores sold 15 million baseball bats in 3 weeks. Oddly enough, no one was buying baseball gloves.
Some stories were left unreported. There were obvious political paybacks for the Clinton election. Drug gangs set up official shadow governments in Los Angeles, Chicago, Detroit and Philadelphia. They held special elections so that “new Americans” could vote. Ordinary politicians relearned the lessons taught by Joseph Stalin and again by Hillary Clinton.
“It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.” Joseph Stalin
The head of the drug gangs were elected with 100 percent voter turnout.
Some of the press complained personally about the increased violence in their neighborhoods. President Clinton’s public security courts revoked the firearms permits for the security guards protecting the corporate offices and high-rise apartments where those elite newscasters lived. Soon, only politically connected donors were allowed to have armed security guards. The mainstream journalists were shocked that political paybacks would apply to them personally.
Then these elite media performers got the message. They silently moved into gated neighborhoods and shut up.
Security in “flyover country” was never a big concern for the Clinton administration. Country roads were closed at night across the southwest United States. Some roads were close by groups of local homeowners for their own security. Some roads were closed by the drug gangs themselves so the gangs could move drugs and “new Americans” undisturbed. Many roads were simply abandoned at night after innocent travelers were robbed.
That wasn’t a fault. That was a feature as disarmed citizens clamored for more law and order. Each call for safety was enthusiastically met with a push to disarm more honest citizens. The results were predicted and predictable. The push by big government politicians for “public safety” led to bigger government, more patronage, and unprecedented violence.
The Socialists politicians needed to annoy the public before the politicians could grant large payoffs to their political cronies. “Social Justice Warrior” was about to become a very lucrative occupation. Paid Socialist protesters blocked highways. As ordered, police stood back and let the protesters riot.
Gangs took advantage of this new opportunity. They robbed the middle class workers who were stranded on the highway trying to get to work. The lines between hired political protester and street thug were blurred even further.
Ordinary people couldn’t sit still for this. They moved closer to work and moved their work closer to home. The rent in gated high-rise condo-office buildings soared. Doormen with Tasers and truncheons were now a common sight in these locked cubic communities.
A few of the old ranch style business parks were looted by large gangs. Money can move mountains, so others businessmen surrounded their enclaves with an 8 foot high fence sitting atop a 6 foot high vehicle barrier. The US had reinvented the medieval castle. Cinder Block and video cameras replaced stone and bastions.
Small business fled the cities. They had no choice. Political access isn’t cheap, and these small companies couldn’t afford to move into the new walled compounds with private security. They had to move far out into the country where criminals were few and far between. There were fewer firearms police out there as well.
The political disintegration that started with shadow governments coming out of the shadows in Socialist cities was replicated, but with a twist. Small government states like Texas, Idaho and Utah refused to enforce the new federal laws. They set up their own branches of law enforcement with recently “retired” FBI agents. The big-sort continued as millions of us voted with our feet. There were never enough federal agents to control the countryside. These United States became less united by the hour.
The rest of the story you can read in your books on political history. You see, all this happened before. The siren song of safety is eternal, but weakening the vulnerable has never made them less vulnerable. Politicians are entirely predictable as well. The one thing that hasn’t changed with time is human character. Sure, the tools we use may change, but human character determines everything.
The great thing about our age is that learning a politician’s character is easier than ever. You can’t stop the signal.
“We have division in our house. And that sounds bad…right? A house divided cannot stand. President Abraham Lincoln himself said that, and was quoting the Bible (Matthew 12:25). But, that is only true if the divided parts turn on each other, and that is only true if division is a permanent condition, rather than a temporary state. And I have argued many times, and still argue today, that division and dissension can be good. This nation was built and our Constitution was forged out of the same passions, the same anger, and the same division that we feel today. The danger lies in the bobble-head-like, lockstep agreement with whatever the all-knowing, all-powerful people “at the top” hand down to us. Division indicates we haven’t yet swallowed the Kool-Aid. And that is good.”
Read more of Chery’s article here => Divided and Down, But Not Out, by Cheryl Todd – Gun Freedom Radio
This time President Hillary Clinton kept her word. It started even before she was sworn into office. President Hillary Clinton outlawed firearms, just as she said she would. Legal scholars pointed out that President Clinton’s executive orders never said firearms were illegal, not in so many words. That was technically true, but that is what happened in fact. This is what happened in Hillary’s “Gun-Free” America.
President Obama had already appointed a large number of pro-government judges to the US Federal Circuit Courts. Clinton accelerated the appointments. She bypassed the legislative review process, by claiming a state of emergency. Of course, that was illegal, but 41 loyal Democrat Senators made Clinton immune from legislative rebuke. Elections have consequences.
The Clinton judges, along with Clinton’s executive orders, “reinterpreted” consumer products laws. The new Clinton laws let any “injured party” sue firearms manufacturers. The results were sad to watch. The victims of gang shootings in our inner city were mostly young minority men raised by single moms. Once the lawsuits started, these young men had more family than the Duggars. The injured had more relatives than the Daughters of the American Revolution. Teachers sued if their students were wounded. Chicago Ministers joined in the lawsuits if their parishioner’s house was hit by a stray bullet.
The trial lawyers who had missed out on the big tobacco settlement 19 years ago had learned their lesson. Tens of thousands of plaintiff’s lawyers had ten years of cases lined up in the courts in no time. Clinton responded to the “judicial emergency” and appointed special judges to hear the backlog of firearms related cases.
Any business who touched a firearm was mentioned in the lawsuits, from manufacturers to distributors, from retailers to gunsmiths. And, of course, their insurance companies. Any company with an insurance policy or deep pockets was named in the Clinton lawsuits.
Firearms sales to police agencies were technically exempt from the new Clinton gun laws. Lawyers from the firearms industry knew better and refused to sell even to the cops. They knew that thousands of firearms were stolen.. or mysteriously resold, from law enforcement inventories each year. Each stolen gun was a potential lawsuit. Industry complained that they couldn’t make a profit selling to law enforcement.
That wasn’t a fault; that was a feature.
The solution was politically simple. A Clinton crony bought the rights and tooling from a recently bankrupt firearms company. President Clinton simply restarted a government arsenal to turn out guns for the armed forces and police. A percentage of each sale went to the Clinton Foundation.
Any agency or industry who accepted government money was told it was now a gun-free zone. That included a surprising number of places. A church was declared a gun free zone because state aid helped pay for their daycare center. Even armed law enforcement officers were told to say out.. unless they were on duty. Taking the king’s shilling meant obeying the king.. or the new queen.
Small-government states were outraged. Some pro-rights states closed the offices of federal agencies located in their states. Some states reacted differently. Big-government states were furious.. that they didn’t get a cut of the now legal looting of the firearms industry. New York State imposed a special tax on any proceeds of the firearms lawsuits granted to New York residents. Other big-government states followed New York’s lead.
The news networks, the publicly traded media, were joyous at these new laws. Story after story claimed that President Clinton’s new gun laws would end violence in America. On the other hand, the public was furious.
The weak kneed republicans put up a bill that outlawed Clinton’s extra legal action. The republican bill was filibustered in the Senate. The filibuster was finally broken by invoking special rules for closure. President Hillary Clinton simply ignored the new regulations and refused to sign them. Clinton had her federal judges and she had her 40 Democrat Senators to block her impeachment. Clinton granted herself special funding privileges to pay for her new
anti-gun pro-safety initiatives.
President Clinton could do as she pleased, and she did.
Big box retail stores pulled their firearms inventory overnight. A legal feeding frenzy started as bankruptcy lawyers competed with personal injury lawyers to file lawsuits. Liberal police chiefs seized the inventory of smaller firearms stores so the “tainted assets” wouldn’t disappear before the lawsuits were settled.
Some large companies were exempt from the seizures. Those large companies sold their firearms inventory to overseas buyers. It turned out that those companies had made sizable contributions to the Clinton Foundation.
Gun owners found themselves on the Department of Homeland Security No-Fly list. Saying they were overwhelmed, the DHS stopped processing appeals. President Clinton set up “voluntary turn-in sites” where subjects could turn in their registered firearms. If you wanted to fly, you turned in your guns.
The interstate transport of firearms was outlawed. Being a registered gun owner was now probable cause for a traffic stop. Hell, having your car registered to the same address as a gun owner was a good enough excuse to get pulled over. Firearms were seized on the spot. Citizens could appeal in court.. if they had the time and money. Some officers enforced the new gun ban. Some didn’t.. And that was a problem for President Clinton.
That is how Hillary Clinton disarmed the US. What happened next is covered in part two.
I listened to Hillary Clinton. I’m not a politician, so maybe that is why I can still tell the truth from a lie. Hillary lied about me. If Clinton would lie about me, what would she say about you?
You see, I am an ordinary gun owner. Hillary said that the government has the right to have guns, but ordinary citizens don’t. That is really strange, because I thought ordinary citizens like you and me were the source of rights.. rights like free speech and freedom to worship. It doesn’t make sense that when it comes to guns, the government claims to have “rights” that the people themselves don’t have. I’m sure Hillary can bribe and blackmail judges to say almost anything, but that doesn’t make it the truth.
Hillary said that we would be safer if we had to seek government permission for me to let a boy scout or girl scout touch my firearms. I’m sorry, but Hillary lied again. The deliberate ignorance about guns that is pushed on our children has gotten them killed, not made them safer. We should teach firearms safety in every school if we really wanted to “save just one child.” That makes sense to me, but I’ve never been a fan of willful ignorance.
Hillary said that in order to keep our communities safe, we need honest gun owners to stop giving guns to criminals. “We need to close the ‘gun show loophole.’” Unless you live in Manhattan or Los Angeles, then you know that every gun law that applies outside a gun show also applies inside a gun show. Hillary has to know that criminals don’t go to gun shows. Instead, criminals break our 23 thousand existing gun laws every day. Criminals get their guns illegally rather than from honest gun owners and gun dealers. Honest gun owners can’t buy a gun online. Hillary had to know that, so why did she lie about me again?
Clinton said that guns are killing young black men. Let’s be clear about that tragedy. Young men are dying in our democrat controlled cities. They are dying because democrat politicians killed businesses, destroyed families, and ruined schools. I live in the south, and both blacks and whites have guns down here. We don’t kill each other with them. In fact, our sheriffs ask for help during a flood, a hurricane or a tornado. Doesn’t your sheriffs do the same? Why is Hillary blaming ordinary citizens for the problems created by Democrat politicians?
Again, Hillary blames “the gun”. She said that urban violence in democrat controlled cities is caused by “military style weapons”. Even the FBI disagrees. The FBI says military weapons, meaning rifles, are almost never used in crimes. True, our inner cities have huge problems with Mexican drug gangs, but that is because of prohibition and our open-borders policies. Why did Hillary lie about me and excuse her own failed policies?
I’ve heard Hillary say we should take guns from people on the TSA “no fly” list. Fewer than 2 percent of the people on the “no fly” list are actually terrorists. To me, the “no fly, no buy” list sounds like a way to disarm poor minorities who are already abandoned by police in our inner cities. That really bothers me because the poor can’t hire a lawyer to the government and get their rights back. Why would Clinton treat poor people so badly?
Hillary said we should disarm terrorists, but we’ve seen recent terrorists sail right through Hillary’s background checks. Hillary said there should be a 25 percent tax on guns. We’ve seen terrorists receive lots of money from Clinton’s donors like Saudi Arabia. Why is Clinton trying to disarm us while she and her supporters arms terrorists?
Hillary said that gun manufacturers should be liable for how stolen guns are misused by criminals. I’m trying to understand that. Sure, Clinton was a lawyer, and maybe that makes sense to her. I’m pretty sure we don’t treat any other product that way, but I am not a lawyer. Clinton said she’d issue new gun laws by executive order. Those are the actions of an emperor, not a president. Clinton wants to fine us for stolen guns. Instead, we should prosecute politicians for our stolen freedoms.
The next think you know, Hillary will blame us for her corrupt campaign donations and voter fraud.
I’m tired of her lies. I’m tired of being blamed for her failures. I wish Hillary Clinton would stop lying, but if Hillary only spoke the truth, then she might not have anything to say.
Bill Frady built and runs Lock and Load radio. I am a regular listener, and I contribute material when I can. I think Bill wanted to let his listeners hear something a little different. Bill invited Paul Lathrop and I to host his show. Recording a two hour podcast is very different from performing a three hour live broadcast. I hope Bill’s listeners were entertained and informed.
You can listen to Bill on his website as well as on Stitcher and I-tunes. Paul and I recorded episode 1003 if you’d like to hear us.
I had fun. Thank you Bill. Thank you Paul.