How Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump stack up in terms of your right to own and carry your knives is an issue you should weigh carefully before voting Nov. 8.
According to Knife Rights Chairman Doug Ritter, Clinton’s anti-gun and anti-Second Amendment agenda is a major plank of her campaign. She advocates undermining the Second Amendment through legislation, executive actions and, more importantly, her appointment of justices to the Supreme Court. Over the years she has endorsed most proposals to limit gun ownership and destroy the Second Amendment through extreme taxes, regulations and executive orders.
“The loss of Second Amendment rights by way of her anti-gun agenda would be certain to disadvantage knife owners as we fight to oppose irrational restrictions on our knives,” Ritter noted. “As we have seen elsewhere, once firearms are outlawed, knife restrictions follow.”
Trump, meanwhile, is pro-Second Amendment and has been endorsed by the National Rifle Association and other Second Amendment organizations. His proposed nominees for the Supreme Court have a record of opposing efforts to weaken the Second Amendment.
As for the ivory issue, Ritter noted that the campaign against ivory owners in the USA, including owners of ivory-handle knives and raw ivory used by knifemakers and scrimshanders, was launched by the Clinton Foundation as part of its Clinton Global Initiative. “The Clinton Foundation and non-governmental organizations affiliated with it continue to advocate for the complete and total ban on all trade in ivory in any form,” Ritter wrote. “They are being assisted by the Fish and Wildlife Service. They are even pushing to ban sustainable use of wildlife in Africa, the core science behind the world’s most successful wildlife conservation efforts that have brought many species back from the brink of extinction.”
Clinton also likely would oppose the African Elephant Conservation and Legal Ivory Possession Act (AECLIPA), an act that would repeal the recent federal ivory ban, resetting the rules back to where they had been for decades, and would enhance elephant conservation efforts in Africa.
Conversely, Trump has never supported ivory bans or the end of sustainable use as a science-based conservation model. Trump would be far more likely to make executive appointments that would signal significant changes at the Interior Department and FIsh and Wildlife. If Congress passed the AECLIPA, he would likely sign it.