If you listen to liberals like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Michael Bloomberg, you would think that every person who owns a gun is intent on committing some sort of violent crime involving their gun(s). According to them, everyone who walks into a gun shop and purchases a handgun or AR-15, is going to use it to shoot or threaten someone else. It doesn’t matter if you like to just target shoot, hunt or have protection in your own home, Obama and Clinton have already labeled you as a potential violent criminal that needs to be controlled by their liberal government.
In fact, Hillary Clinton has made it known that she wants to hold gun manufacturers and dealers responsible for all violence in which one of their guns was used. In other words, if someone stole a Glock handgun from someone’s home, then illegally sold it to someone else on the street and that person used the gun to commit a violent crime, Clinton believes that Glock and the gun store that sold the gun should be held responsible for the crime. That’s like holding Ford and a local Ford dealership responsible if someone bought an F-150 pickup and then used it to run over and kill someone with. Can you imagine someone going to Walmart and buying a set of Farberware cutlery and then someone uses one of those knives to stab someone and then making Walmart and Farberware responsible for the crime?
Obama and Clinton completely ignore the many instances of where someone used a gun to protect themselves or their family from intruders. They intentionally ignore incidents like what happened last November in Charleston, South Carolina. Two men tried to break into a home through the back door when the 13-year-old son of the homeowner used one of his mom’s loaded guns to prevent their entry. The boy fired once through the door, mortally wounding one of the intruders. There have been many reports similar to this one where someone has legally used a firearm to protect themselves and their family from intruders.
Obama and Clinton also willfully ignore the many reports where someone has legally used a firearm to prevent or stop a mass murder. I previously reported on at least 11 instances where a legal gun owner legally used their gun to stop a mass murder from taking place or to stop one in progress.
Clinton and Obama also ignore crime facts that support gun owners like the recent report from Pittsburgh. CNS News recently reported on a study published in the July edition of Social Medicine. The crux of the report stated that 79% of gun crimes committed in Pittsburgh in 2008 were committed by non-gun owners.
The researchers looked at all 893 of the guns recovered from Pittsburgh crime scenes in 2008 and then traced the guns back to their sources. The 893 guns were used in 762 different crimes carried out by 607 offenders.
They found that only 87 (14.2%) of the crimes were committed by the legal owner of the guns. According to the study:
“Of the 762 cases, 553 (73 percent) involved a total of 607 perpetrators. Most (n = 478, 78.7%) were carrying or linked to a firearm that did not belong to them. Eighty-six (14.2%) were owners that committed an offense while legally carrying their firearm, 10 (1.6%) were owners illegally carrying their firearm but committing no other offense, and 12 (2.0%) were owners that committed an offense while illegally carrying their firearm…”So what good would all of Clinton and Obama’s anti-Second Amendment gun control laws do if they were passed and put in place? This study, along with many other facts clearly demonstrate that the motive behind Clinton and Obama’s gun control measures have nothing to do with reducing gun-related violence but everything to do with their ulterior motive of eventually disarming the American people.
“Given that 79% of perpetrators are connected to firearms for which they are not the legal owner, it is highly likely that a significant amount of theft or trafficking is the source of perpetrators’ firearms.”
Be assured that if Hillary Clinton is elected in November, that she will continue to ignore the facts and work to disarm the American people. If that happens, perhaps it’s time the American people finally stand up for their constitutional rights and take appropriate action to protect those rights.