Hillary Clinton never misses a chance to exploit a tragedy for her own personal and political gain.Ever the hypocrite, she urged Americans to “put politics aside.” Then she proceeded to immediately inject politics into the catastrophic shooting in Las Vegas.
Clinton knew she could not call for a ban of a weapon already banned by law. The fully automatic weapon allegedly used by gunman, Stephen Paddock, was made illegal under federal law back in 1986.
So Clinton invented an ancillary argument that more people would have died if Paddock had used a “silencer.” Survivors were still being treated when she began condemning the National Rifle Association and attacking the law on “silencers.”
Ever the hypocrite, Hillary Clinton urged Americans on Monday to “put politics aside.” Then she proceeded to immediately inject politics into the catastrophic shooting in Las Vegas.
Clearly, Clinton knows nothing about firearms, although she purports to be an instant expert on everything.
Forget that Clinton used the wrong term. “Silencers” don’t silence. The proper and accurate term is “suppressor” because they diminish, but do not eliminate, the sound of gunfire.
But Clinton’s claim that Paddock could have used such a device on his automatic weapon only underscores that Clinton is nothing, if not obtuse. Suppressors do not function well on automatic weapons. They tend to melt or malfunction under the intense heat of automatic fire. For this reason, there are only a few companies that even manufacture them for use on automatic weapons. And there is almost no marketplace for them.
Yet, Clinton is calling for a ban on a device that has no significant history of use in U.S. crime.
The law on suppressors is already strong. Pursuant to federal law, a person has to have a permit to own or possess one and only after undergoing a criminal background check. Violation of the law is a felony punishable by up to ten years in prison. If it is used during the course of a crime, the penalty is enhanced to 30 years.
Clinton is obviously unaware that Illegal use of suppressors in murder cases is exceedingly rare. According to a study by Paul A. Clark in the Western Criminology Review, there were only two federal murder cases using a suppressor during a ten year period of time (1995 to 2005). Both involved handguns. One of the suppressors was homemade. Clark concluded that the illegal use of suppressors to commit murder is so miniscule that a ban on the devices is “unlikely to have any effect on crime”.
The mass murderer who terrorized Las Vegas Sunday was using an illegal weapon. There is no evidence he used a “silencer,” as Clinton calls it, to commit his heinous deeds.
But Hillary Clinton doesn’t care about the facts and existing law.
She cares only about a political agenda that serves to promote herself, even in the face of tragedy.
Gutfeld on James Bond's drinking problemIs James Bond an alcoholic?A new research study states...
ObamaCare ruling in Texas should have Republicans running scared, not rejoicingIt has been over two months since the midterm...
Willie Robertson: Our American dream started out smack in the middle of a nightmare. Then this happenedDiligent hands will rule.– Proverbs 12:24As long as there’s...