MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Bill Clinton Says 'You Can't Have People Walking Around With Guns'

The Constitution says otherwise.

CNNCNNYesterday on CNN's State of the Union, former President Bill Clinton responded to a question about what's wrong with Baltimore by blaming guns:

Clinton: The Baltimore thing came on the heels of what happened in Ferguson, what happened in New York City and all these other places. And there is a big national movement about whether the lives of young African-American men count.

Jake Tapper: #BlackLivesMatter, yeah.

Clinton: Yeah. You can't have a bunch of people walking around with guns. I used to tell people when we did Bosnia, Kosovo, anything like that: You get enough people with weapons around, and there will be unintended consequences. People make mistakes. People do wrong. Things happen. 

To hold a community together, you've got to have a high level of community trust. Somebody that's in your family gets shot, you want an answer from someone you know, and you want to be able to ask questions and get them answered and resolve them. So I think that in addition to economics, we need to look at the places in America where these things happen and they don't drive people into the streets because they actually trust the process. 

Clinton begins and ends by referring to guns carried by cops, so you might surmise that he favors disarming the police. But that middle part apparently alludes to guns carried by young black men in cities like Baltimore, which he likens to guns carried by combatants in European civil wars. The implication is pretty clear: "You get enough people with weapons around," and the result is bound to be ugly: a shockingly high homicide rate and general disorder, if not ethnic cleansing and genocide.

Except we know that's not true. While the question of whether more guns means less crime remains a subject of lively debate, it is quite clear by now that loosening the rules for carrying guns in public does not inevitably lead to blood in the streets. The guns to which Clinton is referring, of course, are for the most part not carried by law-abiding people with permits to possess concealed weapons in public. Even for people without criminal records, such permits are hard to get in Maryland, where applicants must demonstrate what the state deems a "good and substantial reason," typically based on an imminent threat to one's life. But the experience of states with nondiscretionary carry permit policies, including Clinton's native Arkansas, shows that having "people with weapons around" does not necessarily translate into widespread violence. In any event, it is hard to see what that has to do with the amount of trust that people have in the process for investigating allegations of excessive force by police, which is Clinton's ostensible topic.

Clinton's remarks raise a constitutional question as well as an empirical one. It is hard to reconcile the position that "you can't have people walking around with guns" with the Second Amendment's declaration that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Even when they concede a constitutional right to own a gun, Democrats tend to ignore that second part.

Clinton's wife is, if anything, less keen on gun rights than he is.

[via Breitbart]

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • sloopyinTEXAS||

    (Omitted from the story)

    Clinton, surrounded by his armed Secret Servuce detail, made the statement on CNN Sunday. Upon leaving the show he walked, accompanied by his armed phalanx, to his waiting armored car where his armed driver drove him back to his residence, which is protected by armed men 24 hours a day.

  • John Galt||

    The hypocrisy of our political royalty is boundless.

  • Illocust||

    Actually, that would be an interesting thing to do for all these interviews. Every time a politician mentions gun control always make sure to mention how they and their families are protected by armed men.

  • BambiB||

    AND challenge them to dispense with the armed bodyguards. Right there. On air. Challenge them. Just say, "So, you're giving up your bodyguards as of this minute, right? No more guns will be used to protect your (miserable) life?"

    Watch them choke on it.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    A liberal lied about guns? This is my shocked face.

    Repeat after me "You're not pushing for confiscation? If I like my guns I can keep my guns, just like my insurance?"

    Some more lies, via Instapundit

  • John Galt||

    I say you can't have murdering liars like Bill Clinton running around loose attacking the citizenry's civil rights.

  • sloopyinTEXAS||

    Not to mention frequenting Pedophile Island on the Lolita Express.

  • John Galt||

    Ol' Billy boy doesn't believe "under-age" plugs any holes. He's proved it in the past.

  • Rich||

    there is a big national movement about whether the lives of young African-American men count.

    Of course they do:
    39, 40, 41, ....

  • straffinrun||

    And it's not even a leap year.

  • straffinrun||

    In all fairness to Billybob, if I were to walk around telling people we can't have people walking around with guns, I wouldn't want people walking around with guns, either.

  • Mike M.||

    I guess Billary really have decided to renounce their own legacy and go full Obama retard. Pretty sad.

  • John Galt||

    I'm going to be sad if I have to spend these last golden years witnessing another Clinton or Bush presidency.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    You won't.

    Neither will be nominated by their respective parties.

  • Mike M.||

    You really think someone is going to knock off Hillary?

    I just don't see it. She's polling around 60%, and the rest of the clowns are all fifty points behind or more.

  • Inigo M.||

    He's actually right. You let a bunch of psychopathic, power-hungry, uniformed bullies walk around with guns and then you give them a union that grants them virtual immunity from responsibility for their actions and you will have bad things happen.

  • ||

    He's right in his own mind(ala "It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is.")! What he really wants is less guns so there are more opportunities to steal someone else's money, which seems to be his hobby.

  • PM||

    Just in case anybody forgot that the 90's wasn't all internet IPOs and grunge, this is the same guy who signed the '94 federal "assault weapons" ban. Not exactly a surprising position for him to take.

  • sloopyinTEXAS||

    At least he is gonna keep his hands off the woodchippers.

    For now.

  • The Shrubber's Woodchipper||

    You'll have to pry my woodchipper from my cold, calloused, splintered, dead hands.

  • John Galt||

    Speaking of guns, there's a YouTube channel titled "Ballistic BBQ" featuring this dude that does nothing except grill different kinds of burgers on his BBQ. Despite the channel name it doesn't have anything to do with firearms. But it does have me feeling anxious for dinner and it's barely 6 am here.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    #DavidianLivesMatter

  • Mickey Rat||

    Bill Clinton is a Democrat Party hack who sticks to left wing anti-gun dogma even when his backing examples make no bloody sense?

    How utterly expected.

  • some guy||

    the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

    No, see everyone pretty much mis-interprets this sentence. "Keep", here is the noun, meaning a fortress or castle. And "bear arms" means the fore-legs of an ursine creature. So we have the right to our castle and to whatever bears arms we can acquire. We have no right to have guns, even though this will make it difficult to obtain our bear arms.

  • sarcasmic||

    And the militia! Don't forget the militia! The 2A authorizes the National Guard to have guns, not the people! Well, the government is The People, so the 2A authorizes the government to have guns! But that's it! You can't trust anyone else with guns! You certainly can't trust an emotionally unstable leftist like me with a gun, so you can't trust anyone with a gun! Except government, which is The People, not the people!

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    Plus, the National Guard can only have flintlock muskets! And use them to mount slave patrols.

  • ||

    The ignorance of the common American with respect to his constitutional rights is astonishing.

    "A well regulated militia" clearly means one in which the officers are gentlemen, and not the hoi polloi. The right to keep and bear arms thus refers to the right to have one's arms devised by the College of Arms in London, notwithstanding the general severing of ties caused by independence

  • Joe_C||

    Brilliant. Bear arms, I've heard, but keep? Sheer brilliance.

  • sarcasmic||

    When you have a lot of people walking around with guns, then you're going to have more gun violence! Those stupid "facts" that say otherwise came from Rethuglicans who want poor people to kill each other! People who want to ban guns have good intentions, while the Rethuglicans have bad intentions! Rethuglicans want the poor to kill each other off so that the rich will inherit the earth! They're in the pocket of the Koch brothers who want to see all poor people die! They want to take away health care and replace it with guns! They're evil! It feels true so it must be true! No amount of Rethuglican "facts" can change what I feel because I feel it's true!

  • straffinrun||

    I've had it up to here *raises a hand foot above head* with obstructionist, do nothing bums not doing something other than *shakes closed fist in front of groin*. We need a person who will break through *rams fist in an upper cut* the gridlock and ensure those opposing our agenda will get what's coming *runs thumb slowly across neck* to them.

  • sloopyinTEXAS||

    If you're going to directly quote Howard Dean, at least give him credit.

  • Rich||

    "YEEAAHHH!!"

  • commodious spittoon||

    I wonder whether leftists realize they're going to have to push for New York-style stop and frisk programs if they want an effective means to combat inner-city violence. Because this shit with targeting permit-acquiring, law-abiding middle-class citizens for shakedowns is doing jack and shit to improve homicide rates among impoverished blacks.

  • sarcasmic||

    I wonder whether leftists realize they're going to have to push for New York-style stop and frisk programs if they want an effective means to combat inner-city violence.

    Leftists' only complaint against stop and frisk was that it was disproportionally used on minorities, not the tactic itself.

  • commodious spittoon||

    Whatever the case, they're going to have to content themselves with disproportionate results if they're serious about policing minorities. They're unwilling to cross that bridge because their compassion for minorities is skin deep. Reducing inner-city violence isn't a realistic goal given the changes Clinton is after, but hassling compliant gun owners and their political backers is.

    (I'm not advocating stop and frisk.)

  • Rich||

    "You can't have people walking around with guns."

  • straffinrun||

    Especially in Springfield.

  • straffinrun||

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    Yeah, yeah.

    Bill is a country boy from BFE, Arkansas. There's zero chance he doesn't have some minimal understanding of the importance of firearms and probably had some personal sympathy with riflemen back before he became a RHODES SCHOLAR and left behind the world of the filthy proletariat dirt farmer.

    Both Clintons would run down a busload of North Korean orphans if they thought it would help them win votes. If their team tells them that being a pro-RKBA candidate will swing a half-dozen more votes Hillary's way, she'll be playing Charlton Heston in an upcoming campaign ad. Unlike Obama, who is a standard lefty junior professor with canned lefty junior professor beliefs, the Clintons are not burdened by beliefs of any sort.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    *As opposed to us libertarians, who are merely roads scholars.

  • Juan "Brushmaster" Seguin||

    I have a Masters in Face Paint Studies.

    Which makes me a Woad Scholar.

    Wokka wokka.

  • Rebel Scum||

    Bill Clinton Says 'You Can't Have People Walking Around With Guns'

    Hmmm...

    A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.. - Constitution, US

    That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. - Constitution, Commonwealth of VA (my home State)

    I respectfully disagree.

  • straffinrun||

    Respect is to be earned.

  • Joe_C||

    My state includes all men 18-35 (I believe that's the proper upper bound) in its militia. So yeah, either way I'm covered—whether you want to interpret it correctly or interpret it like an idiot.

  • modurhead||

    why doesnt he apply that logic to the weaponization of police and SWAT, no knock raids and attacking citizens for non violent offenses and shooting their dogs? Oh thats right, those armed state troopers and secret service are the ones who guard his door while he gets a bj behind his wife's back. what a stand up guy bill blinton is.

  • Florida Man||

    FTA: Clinton begins and ends by referring to guns carried by cops, so you might surmise that he favors disarming the police.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    I am enthused by the Clinton gun-control message. It is a winner. Totally. Keep it up, Clintons.

  • Rich||

    "I used to tell people when we did Bosnia, Kosovo, anything like that: You get enough people with weapons around, and there will be unintended consequences"

    "I used to tell people when we did Gennifer, Monica, anything like that: You get enough people with vaginas around, and there will be unintended consequences."

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Let's list the other ways Baltimore is like Bosnia...

  • Florida Man||

    Approximately the same latitude?

  • Rich||

    They both start with "B" and have access to the ocean?

  • Charles Easterly||

    Hillary was shot at in both locations?

  • AlmightyJB||

    Clinton was clueless about Bosnia too.

  • Jayburd||

    The U.N. didn't do shit?

  • AlmightyJB||

    It's not like I was ever going to vote for her anyways

  • AlmightyJB||

    Of course the dilemma becomes if Rand does not get the GOP nom and he most likely won't, do you still vote GOP to keep her out of the White House? Or do you vote for Gary Johnson who will never be president. Deja Vu. I don't see myself pulling a lever for most of GOP field but ya know.

  • Charles Easterly||

    If faced with the scenario you describe JB I will vote for Gary Johnson again.

  • AlmightyJB||

    I will probably do so again as well. At least I can go straight from the polls to the bar without having to go home and shower first.

  • The Elite Elite||

    Depends who the GOP nominee is. While Rand is the top choice, there are a couple of others I'd vote for. (Or at least I'd need to do some more research on before deciding one way or the other).

  • Woodchippin' 4 Jesus||

    Your vote only matters if you live in a 'swing state'. I live in California, the land of fruits, nuts and Democrats. My vote doesn't matter.

    Same goes with deep red states.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Ohio

  • Woodchippin' 4 Jesus||

    Your vote counts then. Big time. In fact, you probably have the future of our Republic in your hands.

    So don't screw it up. Please.

  • Swiss Servator, Holzhacker||

    Fuck off, W.C. Fields-nosed slaver.

  • Jordan||

    The award for most unique insult of the day goes to Swiss Servator.

  • Rich||

    Godfrey Daniel, Swiss!

  • Jordan||

    You can't have people walking around with guns. I used to tell people when we did Bosnia, Kosovo, anything like that: You get enough people with weapons around, and there will be unintended consequences.

    It was the guns themselves wot did it.

  • Mark22||

    So he is saying police aren't people? Glad he cleared that up.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    More elitist racism from the Party in Charge of Infantilizing Black People.
    And the base will gobble it up.

  • Charles Easterly||

    I found President Clinton's statements to be rather incoherent.

  • Woodchippin' 4 Jesus||

    He ain't no spring chicken anymore

  • Slammer||

    such permits are hard to get in Maryland, where applicants must demonstrate what the state deems a "good and substantial reason," typically based on an imminent threat to one's life.

    Living in Democrat run Baltimore with Hillary running for President IS "a good and substantial" reason

  • Slammer||

    ^^^^this is hyperbole and NOT a threat, goddamit

  • AlmightyJB||

    Knock knock

  • gphx||

    The highest crime rates in the US are in cities where guns are banned and people can't defend themselves from crime. Yes, you can have people walking around with guns. You can't have a Constitution without people walking around with guns.

  • ||

    The highest crime rates in the US are in cities where guns are banned and people can't defend themselves from crime

    That is not really true, unfortunately. New Orleans, LA, West Memphis, AR, and Birmingham, AL are all pretty dangerous and located in states where gun laws are pretty loose. But then again, there's also Oakland, Detroit, Baltimore, etc. The real takeaway should be that there's pretty much no connection between gun laws and violent crime, and yet leftist politicians keep pushing for tighter gun laws.

  • Vampire||

    When individuals are free to arm themselves, the crime rates seem to drop. The very fact that it is unknown which individual is carrying acts as a deterrent for individuals to violate their liberty and take their property.

    It seems the opposite holds true when the state arms its agents. The result is more bloodshed, theft of property by the state, and enforcement of laws antithetical to liberty that are escalate into violence against the individual that isn't harming anyone else's liberty.

    The whole war on drugs has resulted in more imprisonment and chaos. Hell, folks can't even joke out in the open or on forums because the state will send its arm to "question" the individual as they are presumed guilty.

    So maybe the state shouldn't be armed or impose its violence and the resulting chaos on individuals. They should step into the real world, look for a job and participate in the market through voluntary transactions free from force, theft, and coercion.

  • Woodchippin' 4 Jesus||

    The basic question still remains: do you own your own body or not?

  • AlmightyJB||

    The desire to ban guns has nothing to do with crime or Baltimore. It's about power and control.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Which is why there is a Second Amendment in the first place.

  • Woodchippin' 4 Jesus||

    Which is why they are going to ban bullets. Don't laugh, they are quite serious.

  • AlmightyJB||

    I'm not laughing. I've heard them suggest 2000% taxes on ammo. Because only rich people have constitutional rights.

  • Bodica Slayer of Woodchip||

    And the "criminal" element will finally realize the error of their ways and quit shooting each other . . . .

    Their logic is so stupid, I am often speechless.

    Then, I think of black markets, 3-d printers and ways to screw the bureaucrats over.

    There are ways, my friend. We don't have to be sheep, baa-baaing our way to the slaughterhouse.

  • Woodchipper of the Apocalypse||

    Yeah, pretty sure the only people "walking around with guns" in Bosnia back then were the fucking JNA. If the people of Sarajevo had guns, that situation would have ended much sooner.

    In other words,Clinton is a dipshit, but we all know that already.

  • AlmightyJB||

    You can't have serial rapist just walking around.

  • Woodchippin' 4 Jesus||

    "You ought to put some ice on that" Bill Clinton's advice to Katherine Willie

  • Woodchippin' 4 Jesus||

    If I made my own gun, Bill, you would never be the wiser.

    3D

  • Spaceno42||

    Kinda disappointed Reason. No mention of http://hotair.com/archives/201.....epartment/ at all.

    It's ok to complain about Police abuse (Which there shouldn't be any abuse). But you have to do both sides of the coin.

  • AlmightyJB||

    That's old news. Already been discussed. One crazy dude. They shot him. It's over. Thankfully no one else was hurt. I'm not sure how that's a flip side to anything?

  • Pulseguy||

    What Bill really said is "you can't have young black men walking around with guns", but no one wants to read between the lines. He said there are problems in certain communities which has reduced trust and if you add to that guns, you get problems. True. And, which communities would those be? Rural farm areas in Texas? Small town Washington State? Nope. All black communities, or nearly all.

    And, Bill's solution? Take guns away from those rural communities.

    I'm a Canadian, and I've lived in a small town once. Everyone had a gun. Occasionally you had to shoot towards a bear to get him away from your property. They weren't trying to kill the bear, just scare it away. No one shot anyone. And, it was a tough little town, lots of fights; and no one would think of bringing a gun to one.

  • Woodchippin' 4 Jesus||

    Your story could be mine - except Wyoming, instead of Canada, and coyotes instead of bears.

    I think Bill Clinton was bemoaning young black bears, not young polar bears.

  • Jayburd||

    This is a great project for a "First Man".

  • TxJack 112||

    Why? Because the Progressive elites have declared this to be true from on high? They always claim more guns equals more violence while ignoring that the only places where mass shootings or frequent shootings occur are gun free zones and cities with gun bans. Criminals ignore the law by definition and when they are the only ones with guns, they win. It is very easy to claim people do not need guns when you travel everywhere surrounded by an armed detail.

  • Bodica Slayer of Woodchip||

    So much for the era of big government being "over", eh Bill?

  • AD-RtR/OS!||

    "...You can't have people walking around with guns..."

    Yeah, especially fathers, brothers, husbands, or boy-friends!

  • johncorn||

    "You can't have people walking around with guns." If one can't accept the fact of the 'bad guys' walking around with guns, one is totally detached from reality. Gun owners with open carry or concealed carry permits, who carry guns are not the threat that the anti-gun crowd thinks they are, as they generally know nothing about either guns or the licensing process. Clinton apparently falls neatly into that category.

  • Russ Davis||

    How is it possible that ANYONE still listens to Monica's old suckee!?! Wonderful how old suckee wants to outlaw guns so that only outlaws have guns, not the honest citizens the Founders (whom the old lawless, fascist slut traitor's long rejected) intended by the Second Amendment Monica's suckee's treasonous party of lawless fascism has long wanted gone along with the rest of the Constitution the vile traitors loathe. God save us.

  • Russ Davis||

    Contrary to Monica's suckee's fact-free delusions, his asininely vaunted "gun control" merely cause more deaths, not less, not that Dims are capable of dealing with reality.

  • Chuck in CR||

    Rifles, muskets, long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon -- so long as there is no answer to it -- gives claws to the weak.
    -- George Orwell, "You and the Atom Bomb", 1945

  • John B. Egan||

    The 2nd Amendment says can be interpreted in various ways: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

    You can interpret it to mean 'there will be no infringement on the right to bear arms'. If that's true, then I'd certainly like a Howitzer, a nuke or Sherman thank. Yet you can't. Nor can you carry arms in various venues...Notably Govt Chambers. Even legislators that pass open carry don't want them around them.

    You can also interpret it as "we need a militia, and we don't have National Guards, or police forces (as we do now), so to 'protect the state', we need armed citizens to be ready to answer the call."

    Personally, I fall in the 2nd category.

    George Washington was the main impetus in pushing for the 2nd Amendment...Not to arm the citizens against a repressive government (understandably, people believe this 'common sense' argument, as we had just tossed off the yoke of the 'repressive British King," but to have ready a military force to 'preserve our fledgling union' against resurrection, such as Shays Rebellion.

    2nd Amendment Lies | https://bitly.com/a/bitlinks

  • Chuck in CR||

    Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.
    -- Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491

  • Duelles||

    Psychopath to himself, " let's get a gun and go to some gun-free zone and kill us some folks." Bill is not to be listened to as a reliable source of anything but the funding of his family via that foundation thing of his. What doof.

  • tgiordan||

    The problem isn't people carrying guns, it's criminals carrying guns. Clinton should know better, but he is carrying water for the lefties.

  • BambiB||

    I believe Clinton on guns as much as I believed him when he said, "I did not have sex with that woman. Monica Lewinsky. I never did."

    Why does anyone even listen to this has-been buffoon?

  • Alan@.4||

    Who, I wonder, was curious, unlearned or just plain dumb enough to ask his opinion, or was this a rare "freebee" from the Clinton Clan (Mr. and Mrs.)??

  • D. M. Michell||

    " We need to look at the places in America where these things happen and they don't drive people into the streets because they actually trust the process."

    Wasn't there a blue-eyed guy with an Hispanic name in Florida who was being transported in a police van recently and who died. Didn't you see all the rioting and mass protests because of that? What? You didn't. Oh wait. That's right. He wasn't black. Only black lives matter to the people who live off the racial card.

  • Inquisitor||

    Hillary is even more anti-gun rights than Bill! Even more reason to support National Concealed Carry Reciprocity! Spread the word: WE NEED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT OUR SAFETY ALSO! Contact your US congressional representatives and let them know that we need, and you support, the following Bills: H.R.402, H.R.923, H.R.986, and S.498. Also, let them, especially the Democrats, know that:

    Citizens with a Concealed Handgun License:
    o Have no felony convictions.
    o Have never been convicted of domestic violence.
    o Have no history of mental illness or drug addiction.
    o Have passed a background check and have their fingerprints on file with the Authorities.
    o Have passed mandatory training in both the use of a firearm and the applicable law.

  • Inquisitor||

    The 11 to 12 million civilians with concealed carry permits (who have voluntarily submitted to background checks and licensing) are among the best, most law abiding segments of the population. Better than politicians, judges, and police officers. US DOJ figures show that civilians who use guns in defense are less than 20% as likely as police to use guns wrongly or cause undue harm (2% vs 11%). However, The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA) is a United States federal law, enacted in 2004, allows two classes of persons: the "qualified law enforcement officer" and the "qualified retired law enforcement officer"; to carry a concealed firearm in any jurisdiction in the United States, regardless of state or local laws, with certain exceptions, but National Concealed Carry Reciprocity bills have been stalled in the US Congress for at least the last 6 years due to blockage by the Democratic Party.

  • Inquisitor||

    Currently there are 3 National Reciprocity Bills in the House: H.R.402 with 90 sponsors = 2 Democrats & 88 Republicans, H.R.923 with 34 sponsors = 0 Democrats & 34 Republicans, H.R.986 with 170 sponsors = 3 Democrat & 167 Republicans and a duplicate of H.R.923 in the Senate as S.498 with 29 sponsors = 1 Democrat & 28 Republicans. We need a 2/3 vote in both houses because we can't let the Democrats continue to violate the United States Constitution and prevent us from protecting ourselves. Our right to defend ourselves does not end at States' borders! We also can't wait and hope for a non-Democratic Party President in 2016.

  • glenux||

    Now, Bill.
    Let's not start talking about disarming the American public and we won't start talking about disarming your body guards.
    Does that sound fair?

  • AlgerHiss||

    Good grief, this Clinton character is the epitome of the sissy, cowardly, effeminate, alleged male.

    He's perfect material for the transgender crowd.

  • Ray_Cathode||

    I prefer to not see Clinton walking around with HIS weapon - his dick.

  • Longtail||

    It's funny, when I read the Constitution I hear something about "a well ordered militia". When conservatives read it that phrase disappears. I guess the meaning of the Constitution is in the eye of the beholder.

  • William Pilgrim||

    I have no idea how this idiot balanced the budget.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online