Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton asks, “What is wrong with us that we can’t stand up to the NRA and the gun lobby and the gun manufacturers they represent?” in response to the shooting at Umpqua Community College (UCC).
In the wake of the attack on Umpqua Community College (UCC) Hillary Clinton is pushing new regulations on gun shows and a change in laws allowing shooting victims and their families to sue gun manufacturers.
Clinton will introduce these latest gun control proposals on October 5.advertisement - story continues below
According to NBC News, Clinton said she would propose “[tightening] rules governing gun show and Internet sales,” which is a reference to the expansion of background checks that has eluded Democrats and Democrat surrogates like Gabby Giffords and Mark Kelly since January 2013. Of course, the problem with this approach is that the UCC gunman passed a background check for his guns, as did almost every mass shooter of note in the last eight years. Breitbart New previously reported that The New York Times admits the clear majority of mass shooters–including Gabby Giffords’ attacker–acquire their guns via background checks.
So expanding background checks would have done nothing to stop the attack at UCC.
But Clinton also wants to use the UCC attack as an opportunity to change the law so that shooting victims and their families can sue gun makers into oblivion. And even though Duke University researcher Chris Conover has demonstrated that owning a car is “80 percent” more dangerous than owning a gun–as relates to the lives of others–Clinton said nothing about allowing crash victims and their families to sue Ford, Chevrolet, Toyota, or Mercedes.
Clinton asked, “What is wrong with us that we can’t stand up to the NRA and the gun lobby and the gun manufacturers they represent?” She is pledging to fight for these new controls and laws as president.advertisement - story continues below
And it is crucial to note that even as Clinton proposes these controls she is going on record pledging to enact them via executive action if Congress refuses to go along with her. In other words, constitutional checks and balances be damned, Clinton will follow Obama’s lead to move her agenda forward via executive fiat when Congress does not play along.