General News

Clinton Says Abortion Is A Constitutional Right But Not Sure If Right To Bear Arms Is A Constitutional Right

By  | 

Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has decided to redefine what rights are listed in the Constitution over the course of a campaign speech and an interview with George Stephanopoulos.

In the video below, Clinton begins with a speech, thanking Planned Parenthood for their contributions, and expressing her belief that murdering an unborn child is a constitutional right:

“Thank you for every woman, in every state, who has to miss work, drive hundreds of miles sometimes, endure cruel medically unnecessary waiting periods, walk past angry protesters, to exercise her CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to safe and legal abortion.”

One of the comical points about this statement, aside from the fact that whether or not you agree with abortion, it is not a constitutional right, is the part where she talks about having to walk past angry protesters to get the abortion.

This is at the same time that Democratic Party supporters are literally attacking and hunting down Donald Trump supporters outside of his rallies. Trump just wants to exercise his constitutional right, the freedom of speech, to tell his supporters what he believes, but the Leftists have violently declared that they will not allow it.

The video then jumps to Hillary being asked by former Clinton Communications Director, George Stephanopoulos, about whether or not the right to bear arms was a constitutional right, or if she believed it was linked to being in a militia.

“I think that for most of our history, there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment, until the decision by the late Justice Scalia. There was no argument, until then, that localities and states and the federal government had a right, as we do with every amendment, to impose reasonable regulations.”

Actually, as the founding fathers explained in mountains of writings on the subject, the rights given to the people are unalienable, which means free from the government taking them away. The reason why the founders were so clear about the rights of the people, was because they were fighting the tyranny of King George III, and did not want to trade one monarchy for another.

The right to bear arms is specifically designed to give the people protection from an out of control and overbearing government.

When Stephanopoulos noticed that Clinton evaded the question as to whether or not the right to bear arms was a constitutional right, he asked a follow up question, looking for clarification.

“Do you believe that their conclusion, that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right?”

Hillary Clinton responded:

“If it is a constitutional right, then it, and every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulations.”

The answer should be simple. Yes, the right to bear arms is spelled out clearly in the Constitution, and therefore it is a constitutional right. For that reason, it is not subject to a bunch of regulations, and it is not the government’s job to decide which citizens can and cannot have a firearm.

There are already laws on the books that a person cannot murder another person, so any more ‘common-sense’ regulations on guns will only impede law-abiding citizens, make it more of a challenge to own a gun, and do nothing to stop criminals.

Report Complaints We welcome complaints about errors that warrant correction (inaccurate information, grammatical errors, etc). To report a problem click on the blue “Report Content” button below. If that doesn’t work you can also use our Contact Form.

For opinion articles, information and opinions put forth by contributors are exclusive to them and do not represent the views of US Chronicle.

  • You must be logged in to post a comment Login

    Spelling error report

    The following text will be sent to our editors: