Clinton’s hypocrisy erupts with doubletalk about guns, Orlando

Clinton’s hypocrisy erupts with doubletalk about guns, Orlando

Alan Gottlieb 
Andre Traversa/


Clinton’s hypocrisy erupts with doubletalk about guns, Orlando


Democrat Hillary Clinton went after guns yesterday in Ohio, insisting that people on no-fly lists should not be allowed to buy guns.

Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images

After opening her remarks Monday in Cleveland by asserting that “today is not a day for politics,” Hillary Rodham Clinton went full-on politics, demanding more gun control and in the process possibly misrepresenting how the terrorist killer in Orlando obtained his firearms.

In response, the Second Amendment Foundation ripped Clinton and President Barack Obama for exploiting the attack to press for more restrictions on firearms. SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb said, “Americans should be appalled that both President Obama and Clinton chose to attack the Second Amendment rights of legitimate gun owners instead of radical Islamist terrorists.”

“If the FBI is watching you for suspected terrorist links,” Clinton declared during a campaign visit, “you shouldn’t be able to just go buy a gun with no questions asked. And you shouldn’t be able to exploit loopholes and evade criminal background checks by buying online or at a gun show.”

The Orlando gunman bought his firearms at retail, filling out Federal forms and completing background checks. He did not acquire those guns at a gun show, nor were they purchased “on line.”

“Americans want a country where they’re not demonized and treated like criminals just because they want to exercise that right.”—Alan Gottlieb, SAF

According to the Seattle Times/AP story, the Orlando terror killer “came under suspicion three full years ago, after boasting of mutual acquaintances with the Boston Marathon bombers and making statements to co-workers that suggested he had radical, violent intentions. But after a 10-month investigation the FBI closed the case, finding no criminal charge to pursue.”

That fact didn’t stop Obama on Sunday from stating, “This massacre is therefore a further reminder of how easy it is for someone to get their hands on a weapon that lets them shoot people in a school, or a house of worship, or a movie theater, or a nightclub. And we have to decide if that’s the kind of country that we want to be.”

To which Gottlieb retorted, “We want a country where the Second Amendment is treated as the fundamental, individual civil right it protects. Americans want a country where they’re not demonized and treated like criminals just because they want to exercise that right.”

“The European gun control model did not stop the Paris terrorists from getting guns to commit their atrocity,” he added. “When you trade the means to protect your personal security for the promise of government protection you end up with neither.

“If we lose our Second Amendment rights,” he warned, “the radical Islamist terrorists win.”

Monday morning quarterbacks are weighing in, as reported by the Associated Press and Seattle Times today, wondering if a delay in the Orlando police response cost lives. Likewise, another story in the same newspaper today questions whether the FBI missed something in its earlier scrutiny of the gunman.

Meanwhile, a Pennsylvania newspaper is running a poll asking readers if a ban on so-called “assault weapons” would help prevent mass shootings. This morning, the results were lopsided, with more than 93 percent of the respondents saying no, while just over 5.5 percent say yes. More than 13,000 votes had been cast so far.

More is emerging about the killer. He reportedly had visited the Pulse nightclub on previous occasions. One New York newspaper is alleging he was gay. That is apparently based partly on allegations from his ex-wife.

All of this opens up a new narrative that steers the story away from simple terrorism to something else. This, along with the exploitation of the slaughter to ramp up the war on guns might appear to some to be a way to distract the public’s attention from the core issue of terrorism committed by radicalized Islamists. The end result is the same: Increased emphasis on gun control laws that penalize law-abiding citizens but do nothing to prevent crime or future terror attacks.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,