Clinton could make a push to take away citizens’ guns
The Oct. 11 letter, “The math does not add up on fear-inducing gun talk” shows the writer’s ignorance of what occurred in England and Australia. The government doesn’t have to confiscate firearms, citizens will turn them in rather than go to prison. (Of course, the criminals won’t turn in their guns.)
All it will take, after Clinton makes her SCOTUS appointment, is for any city to ban any type of firearm for any reason. The ensuing lawsuits will quickly move to the Supreme Court, where the new majority will overturn the MacDonald and Heller cases, then declare that states and municipalities have the right to ban certain firearms based on public safety, public health or any other “common sense” reasoning.
It will start with “assault weapons” and/or handguns. Next will be semi-auto shotguns and rifles. Soon after, lever and pump-action long guns because, they will say, some people can fire them as fast as a semi-auto (Remember Chuck Connors in “The Rifleman”?).
Finally, the court will find that the Founding Fathers could not have envisioned today’s modern weapons so you will be “allowed” to keep a muzzleloader, if you behave. After all, the Second Amendment was about militias, which we no longer need.
The writer is mistaken if he thinks England and Australia had to go door-to-door to disarm citizens and he is naive if he thinks it can’t happen here. Clinton has stated many times that she would prefer Australia-style gun laws.