by AWR Hawkins16 Oct 201519,084
During an October 16 town hall meeting at Keene State College, Democrat presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton said Australia’s confiscation of firearms via a national buyback provides “a good example” for how other countries responded to mass shootings and she said it is “worth looking at” when considering gun policy in the U.S.Clinton made these statements in response to a questioner who asked if we could ban handgun ownership in the U.S.
Reading from a card, the elderly questioner asked: “[Regarding] handguns…Australia recently managed to take away tens of thousands–even millions–of handguns, and in one year they were all gone. Can we do that? And if we can’t, why can’t we?”
Clinton suggested that by using a buyback to confiscate guns “the [Australian] government was able to curtail the supply and set a different standard for gun purchases in the future.” She went on to say “it would be worth considering doing it on the national level” here.You know, Australia’s a good example, Canada’s a good example, [and] the UK’s a good example. Why? Because each of them had mass killings, Australia had a huge mass killing about 20 or 25 years ago. Canada did as well, so did the UK. In reaction, they passed much stricter gun laws. In the Australian example, as I recall, that was a buyback program. The Australian government as part of trying to clamp down on the availability of…weapons offered a good price for buying hundreds of thousands of guns and basically clamped down going forward, in terms of having more of a background check approach–more of a permitting approach.
On October 3, Breitbart News reported that President Obama hinted at Australian-like gun confiscation in reaction to the heinous attack at Umpqua Community College.
We know that other countries, in response to one mass shooting, have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings. Friends of ours, allies of ours — Great Britain, Australia, countries like ours. So we know there are ways to prevent it.