She wants them, and your magazines, and anything else she can take.
papers found in her husband’s presidential archives in Little Rock show
why the lawsuits that the PLCAA stopped were so important to his anti-gun plans. A January 2000 question and answer document, probably
meant to prepare Bill Clinton for a press conference, asks about his
involvement in the lawsuits against the gun industry. It suggests as an
answer that he “intends to engage the gun industry in negotiations” to
“achieve meaningful reforms to the way the gun industry does business.”
The memo suggests he close with “We want real reforms that will improve
the public safety and save lives.”
is noteworthy: the Clinton White House did not see the lawsuits’
purpose as winning money, but as a means to pressure the gun industry
into adopting the Clinton “reforms.” What might those reforms have been?
The Clinton Presidential Archives answered that question, too. In December 1999, the “Office of the Deputy Secretary” (presumably of Treasury) had sent a fax to the fax line for Clinton’s White House Domestic Policy Council. The fax laid out a proposed settlement of the legal cases. The terms were very well designed. They would have given the antigun movements all the victories that it had been unable to win in Congress over the past twenty years! Moreover, the terms would be imposed by a court order, not by a statute. That meant that any violation could be prosecuted as a contempt of court, by the parties to the lawsuit rather than by the government. A future Congress could not repeal the judgment, and a future White House could not block its enforcement. The settlement would have a permanent existence outside the democratic process.
tells us why Hillary Clinton now considers repeal of a seemingly
obscure, eleven-year-old statute a major objective of her campaign.
She’s picking up where Bill left off, in an effort to impose draconian
standards on gun owners, without engaging in the democratic process.