Hillary Clinton wants more gun control because “terrorism” or something

Anything to get the guns folks, anything!

Via Breitbart:

In response to questions from AARP Bulletin, Hillary Clinton made clear her position that to be successful, policies for ending terrorism must include gun control for all Americans.

AARP Bulletin asked, “What would you do to address terrorism?”

Hillary offered several talking points on fighting actual terrorism, then she went there!

But I’m looking at violence broadly. … It’s also why I’ve advocated gun-safety reform, like comprehensive background checks, closing the gun-show loophole, closing the online loophole—because, you know, it’s not only terrorists we need to be worried about. Terrorism is part of it, but gun violence kills 33,000 Americans a year. … We’ve got to get serious about stemming violence and terrorism in every way we can.

Oh here we go again. First of all we have background checks, yes, even at gun shows. The only “loop-hole” is private sales. And are we not free to sell our property? Further, such “comprehensive” background checks would likely end up making loaning  a relative or friend a firearm, or even allowing you to allow a friend to shoot your gun, or you theirs at a gun range. I would like Hillary to explain how that will reduce crime or stop terrorism.

Secondly, there is no online loophole. Yes, you can buy a firearm online. Yes it will be shipped to an FFL where you, again, federal law, must pass a background check. Several Democrats have made the false claim that you can buy a gun online and have it shipped to your house, that is simply untrue.

Thirdly, the majority, more than two-thirds of “gun violence” deaths each year are suicides. And murder rates, murder by firearm rates, violent crime rates, and accidental firearm deaths have been dropping steadily. In short Hillary is lying. And you must ponder why she is lying when she knows the facts I laid out as well as I do. You have to ask what her true motives are.

Did BLM threats intimidate Tulsa DA?

Via Bearing Arms

Tulsa County District Attorney Steve Kunzweiler has filed first-degree manslaughter charges against Tulsa Police officer Betty Shelby for the shooting death of Terence Crutcher less than a week after he was shot, he did so before the investigation was complete.

The lead detective on the Terence Crutcher officer-involved shooting death says he’s still working on his investigation, hours after the Tulsa County district attorney filed a first-degree manslaughter charge against Tulsa Police Officer Betty Shelby.

Homicide detective Sgt. Dave Walker told 2 Works for You he expects to finish his report on Friday. He said it’s unusual for the district attorney’s office to file charges without his completed report, and that this is the first time he’s seen it happen.

For his part Kunzweiler denies it is unusual to file charges before the police finish an investigation. But given the political pressure from the Social justice Warriors and  one must wonder about the motivation. Did fear of “unrest” make Kunzweiler feel intimidated?

Instead, Kunzweiler seems to have rushed to charge Officer Betty Shelby before the police investigation was complete, and before Terence Crutcher’s toxicology report is complete… and perhaps most importantly, before the weekend, where mass demonstrations and possible riots could have erupted.

This is the biggest concern over the BLM protests, and riots, etc. That law enforcement will stop enforcing laws out of fear for their future and safety. And that DA’s will press charges just to  appease the agitators, which would demoralize officers and embolden criminals. The BLM movement is, at least in large part, and assault on both law enforcement and our justice system. This is dangerous ground we are finding ourselves on. No one would deny that police officers that shoot suspects in an unjustified fashion ought to face the legal penalties. But, justice must be blind, it must not be allowed to be politicized, and that is what is happening in America. And yes, if you are ever forced to use a firearm in self-defense, you might be facing this “social” justice, which, of course, is not about justice at all.