Hillary Clinton, like most of the Democratic candidates, have called out the NRA and Congress for the pressing need of stricter gun control laws. America has become numb to stories of school shootings, from Columbine to Sandy Hook and now to Oregon. Clinton's suggestion to implement the gun buy-back program as enforced in Australia led to a public opposition from the NRA's chief lobbyist, Chris Cox: "Mrs. Clinton's comments validated the fears of gun owners and that her "extreme views are completely out of touch with the American people'." (which personally, is such an absurd statement to make). Clinton did admit that she had no real idea how such a law would be implemented, or how it would work- just that it was an idea worth looking at. However, in the 2008 primaries, she supported her own gun rights credentials, telling Indiana voters about her own childhood experience with guns and hunting, which Obama made fun of her for. Despite her calling-out of the NRA and getting more support for her stance against guns-unlike Sanders who is the most liberal candidate in every way EXCEPT about gun laws- Clinton said to CNN's Jake Tapper that her stance on gun control has not changed, "I spent a lot of years in Arkansas. I have a lot of experience with and respect for people who own guns, collect guns, use them for hunting, use them for target shooting," she said. "But I believe we have gone way too far in being intimidated by the N.R.A.". This is distasteful, because you can't have it both ways. Clinton shouldn't speak of possibly enforcing policies that she doesn't believe in, just because she knows its what the majority of the public wants to hear. It's about more than the NRA, it's about the safety of the American public. Despite her recent popularity after the Democratic debate, Clinton could suffer a hard blow if she keeps flip-flopping on her policies like this all the time.
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/16/hillary-clinton-calling-out-the-n-r-a-gets-a-quick-reply/?ref=politics
I think that although Clinton means well in wanting to minimize mass shootings and giving the people what they want, she should focus more on actually doing things to get the people what they want instead of just playing them along. She should stay firm in her policies, but in her defense, as times change with various events, people's opinions may change as well. Regarding the buybacks program, there definitely needs to be a more careful analysis on that issue because Australia did produce great results from the program, but Australia is different from America.
ReplyDeleteI agree more with Sanders stance on gun control. Before he does anything, he wants the urban and rural areas of America to come to a compromise on gun control. Someone living in a rural area has drastically different views on guns that someone living in an urban area. This can be seen in your post, in which you firmly believe guns are a threat to the American public. Regarding Clinton and her stances on gun control, I believe she does pander to her audience, especially on a controversial social issue like this. I also doubt she would pass any effective gun control legislation, given her past addressing the problem of guns in America.
ReplyDeleteI do feel that Clinton is not standing firm in her political stances. She says she wants a stricter, more enforced gun control law, but at the same time supports the right to own guns. This is, in itself, highly contradictory. To me, it just feels that she is catering to what the people want in order to boost her ratings, especially on an issue as controversial as the one on gun control. I wholeheartedly agree with William in that Clinton should be firm and act on her policies to gain support rather than going with, and changing her views based on what the people want.
ReplyDelete