Plain and simple Hillary Clinton’s plans for your guns are downright terrifying.

At one time the former Secretary of State was much more supportive of the second amendment.

But as soon as it became more in fashion for Democrats of all stripes to oppose gun-ownership she decided to jump ship and became staunchly anti-gun.

Considering the fact she’s still a leading contender for President of the United States it’s quite disturbing to hear what she would do to guns and gun-owners in the U.S.

In a recent town hall she was asked about the infamous Australian buyback program that supposedly reduced gun violence there.

Her reaction to the question is a telltale sign our liberties are in great peril if she becomes President, primarily because she would probably do as much as possible to take guns out of people’s hands.

When asked if she thought it a good idea, and even a possibility to ban guns through these kinds of programs she said:

You know, Australia’s a good example, Canada’s a good example, 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.

But they believed, and I think the evidence supports them, that by offering to buy back those guns, they were able to, you know, curtail the supply and set a different standard for gun purchases in the future.

These kinds of utterances should not be taken lightly.

Mrs. Clinton is power hungry, we can see that plainly.

So for her to endorse these kinds of programs should give Americans cause for concern.

Here’s what’s possibly the most ironic thing about her advocacy of such programs.

She has no problem doling out weapons to known terrorists in Syria while keeping them out of responsible American’s hands.

Rand Paul pointed that back in July when he said “In fact she was the biggest cheerleader for redistributing these arms to Syrian rebels…The reason this is an important issue is many of these people who received the arms are not friends of America.”

Proving Mrs. Clinton only supports anti-gun policies when they’re convenient to her political and social agenda and nothing else.

Do you think if Mrs. Clinton were elected she’d stand a chance of getting a gun ban to go through?

Tell us in the comments below.