Hillary Sort Of Supports A Tax On Firearms

When it comes to the gun control debate, Democrats like Hillary Clinton constantly put the burden on those who purchase them in a legal manner and use them in a legal manner. These could be people that use them for hunting, for sporting, simply because they like shooting, for carrying for protection, or they might just simply leave them in a drawer or closet for home protection. Rarely, though, do Democrats attempt to put the burden solely on those bad actors who use guns poorly, and have usually obtained them illegally. Unsurprisingly, Hillary wants to put the burden on those who want to legally purchase a firearm to protect themselves from the lawlessness and criminal activity created by Democratic policies

(ABC News) On Sunday, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton told George Stephanopoulos on ABC News’ “This Week” that “the American public has a right to require certain kinds of regulatory responsible actions to protect everyone else” from gun violence.

But just how far would a Clinton administration go to ensure that?

Back in September 1993 at a Senate Finance Committee hearing, the then-first lady was asked by then-Sen. Bill Bradley whether she would support a 25 percent sales tax on handguns and automatic weapons. Her support was unequivocal.

Trending: The 15 Best Conservative News Sites On The Internet

“I’m all for that. I just don’t know what else we’re going to do to try to figure out how to get some handle on this violence,” Clinton said. “I’m speaking personally, but I feel very strongly about that.”

That was 1993. Now?

On Sunday, Stephanopoulos asked Clinton whether she still believes in the idea. Although she stopped short of adding it to her campaign promises, saying, “I’m not going to commit to any specific proposal,” she nonetheless issued a comprehensive defense of the policy, suggesting potential revenue from a gun tax could help cover the medical and law enforcement costs of gun violence.

That’s not a “no.”

But her arguments go beyond the context of 1993, Clinton clarified, invoking several survivors of the San Bernardino attack she said she met Friday, “who were cowering in abject terror by the terrorist’s unbelievable assault on their co-workers,” during the incident last December.

“When you have mass shootings, you not only have the terrible deaths, you have people who are injured,” Clinton said. “What they talked to me about was, where do they get the financial support to deal with both the physical and the emotional trauma. You know, is it a workman’s comp support, which is one of the arguments? Is it private insurance, Is it because they work for the county, something the county should pay for?”

“There are real costs that people incur because of the terrible gun violence epidemic. And we have to deal with it,” she added.

She failed to mention that the San Bernardino shooter was an Islamist acting as an Islamist. And that he was living in a heavily Democratic Party state which features pretty much all the gun control measures Leftists have wanted. Yet, was still able to go on a rampage. Perhaps she should be calling for Islamist control, rather than implementing a burdensom tax on those law abiding citizens which would artificially increase the cost of a weapon used to protect themselves from the very crime created by the Democrats soft on crime and criminals policies.

And, perhaps, a woman who is constantly surrounded by people bearing arms to protect her and her family should not make it harder for the rest of us to do the same. Democrats always want the burden on the good guys. How’s the massive gun control working out in her birth town of Chicago?

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!