Today Hillary Clinton refused to acknowledge your Constitutional right to keep and bear arms even though the Supreme Court, in District of Columbia v. Heller, recognized that the Second Amendment applies to the individual’s right to bear arms. Her refusal came during her interview with George Stephanopoulos on today’s edition of ABC’s “This Week.” Before we go any further please remember that Stephanopoulos is a former Democrat Party political advisor, a Communications Director for Bill Clinton’s 1992 Presidential Campaign, President Clinton’s White House Communications Director and a Senior Advisor for Policy and Strategy for President Clinton.
Asked by Stephanopoulos, whether she believes that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right, Hillary tried to deflect the question with a bunch of Kerry-like nuanced gun-grabber talking points. When Stephanopoulos asked her again, Hillary started her answer with, “If it is a constitutional right,” before dishing out more “nuance” about so-called “reasonable regulation.”
Here is the exchange:
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let’s talk about the Second Amendment. As you know, Donald Trump has also been out on the stump, talking about the Second Amendment, saying you want to abolish the Second Amendment.
I know you reject that. But I — but I want to ask you a specific question.
Do you believe that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right, that it’s not linked to service in a militia?
CLINTON: I think that for most of our history, there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment until the decision by the late Justice Scalia and there was no argument until then that localities and states and the federal government had a right, as we do with every amendment, to impose reasonable regulation.
So I believe we can have common sense gun safety measures consistent with the Second Amendment, and, in fact, what I have proposed is supported by 90 percent of the American people and more than 75 percent of responsible gun owners.
So that is exactly what I think is constitutionally permissible.
And once again, you have Donald Trump just making outright fabrications, accusing me of something that is absolutely untrue. But I’m going to continue to speak out for comprehensive background checks, closing the gun show loopholes, closing the online loophole, closing the so-called Charleston loophole, reversing the bill that Senator Sanders voted for and I voted against, giving immunity from liability to gun makers and sellers. I think all of that can and should be done and it is, in my view, consistent with the “Constitution.”
STEPHANOPOULOS: And the “Heller” decision also does say there can be some restrictions.
But that’s what I asked.
I said do you believe that their conclusion that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right?
CLINTON: If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulation. And what people have done with that decision is to take it as far as they possibly can and reject what has been our history from the very beginning of the republic, where some of the earliest laws that were passed were about firearms.
So I think it’s important to recognize that reasonable people can say, as I do, responsible gun owners have a right — I have no objection to that. But the rest of the American public has a right to require certain kinds of regularity, responsible actions to protect everyone else.
Stephanopoulos then asked Hillary how far she would go in her efforts to restrict our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms, reminding her that back in 1993 she actually came out in support of the imposition of a 25 percent national sales tax on guns. When he asked Hillary if she still believed that, she refused to “commit to any specific proposal.” You can read the transcript of that exchange here. You can read about and see a video of Hillary supporting a 25 percent national sales tax on guns here.