Well did they REALLY have an alternative?
I agree - and considered that AFTER posting!Yes. They could tell the truth, and not endorse anyone.
https://soundcloud.com/washington-free-beacon/clinton-bashes-nra“the Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment. And I am going to make that case every chance I get.” - Hillary Clinton
... and has spoken out in favor of gun confiscation:In 1993, the Clinton-chaired President's Task Force on National Health Care Reform contemplated a sin tax on firearms to offset the cost of her husband’s universal healthcare plan. At a Senate Finance Committee hearing on the health care proposal, Clinton endorsed a 25-percent tax on firearms suggested by Sen. Bill Bradley (D-N.J.), stating, “I'm all for that.”
Mandatory registration:On October 16, 2015, while speaking before an audience in Keene, N.H., Clinton was asked, “Recently, Australia managed to get away, take away, tens of thousands, millions, of handguns. And in one year, they were all gone. Can we do that, and why if we can’t, why can’t we?”
Sadly, Clinton would like to allow baseless lawsuits against firearms manufacturers. It is so bad that even Bernie Sanders recognized it would end firearms manufacturing in the U.S.:In 2000, while giving a speech at a Brady Campaign event during her first senatorial campaign, Clinton stated, “I'm the only candidate in this race who supports federal legislation to license handgun owners and register handguns.” Earlier that year, Clinton described her gun control agenda at the Newspaper Association of America's Annual Convention. This included licensing of all handgun owners, a national registry of all handguns sales or transfers, a national ballistics fingerprinting database, a ban on affordable handguns, handgun rationing, and granting the Consumer Product Safety Commission the power to regulate firearms.
So yeah, it is not too surprising that the NRA has endorsed Trump. Ideal? Hardly. A better position on firearms ownership and the right to self defense than Hillary? It would be difficult to imagine a worse position on firearms ownership than Clinton's.In 2004, Clinton took to the Senate floor to oppose the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which protects firearm manufacturers and dealers from liability arising from the unlawful actions of a third party. On March 6, after having been repeatedly attacked by Clinton for not opposing the PLCAA, Clinton’s opponent for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), said of her position, “what you're really talking about is people saying let’s end gun manufacturing in America. That’s the implications of that. And I don't agree with that.”
Unfortunately, I think you are correct on this point,,,, eh well to be more specific, a lot of people, not all people. Some people are emotional, irrational thinkers who let their hearts rule there heads. They will ignore the fact that this election will swing the balance of the supreme court (provided a justice is not confirmed before then). They will conveniently forget how Obama used taxation as an argument and means to impose obamacare, and they will altogether gullibly believe that hillary will not try and likely succeed using the same tactic. Why? Because they think that just because they want something to be a certain way, that is how it is.I think that people who listen to her and then listen to Trump are willing to rely on the checks and balances imposed on the Presidency ....