Assault weapons battle rejoined Feinstein fights to reinstate law

[truthpusher]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/02/26/MNGGLBHDAN1.DTL

Assault weapons battle rejoined
Feinstein fights to reinstate law that expired after 10 years
-------------------------------------------
Edward Epstein, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Saturday, February 26, 2005
-------------------------------------------
Washington -- California Sen. Dianne Feinstein renewed one of Washington's long- running and most bitterly fought battles Friday, saying she will introduce legislation seeking to reinstate the federal assault weapons ban that expired in September after 10 years.

(snip)

While President Bush said he would sign renewal legislation if Congress passed it last year, critics said he never did anything to encourage passage, fearing such a move would upset his conservative base as he sought re-election.

"We're cautiously optimistic,'' said National Rifle Association spokesman Andrew Arulanandam, that the Feinstein bill won't pass the Senate this year. "But we recognize the fact that this is Washington, D.C., and we take nothing for granted.''

In a statement, Feinstein said she hoped Republican leaders would help pass the assault weapons law again.

"This time, I hope for the safety of all Americans, President Bush, Senate Majority Leader (Bill) Frist and Speaker Hastert will help re-enact this important legislation," she said. Text

complete story: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/02/26/MNGGLBHDAN1.DTL

[w4rma]

1. Good grief. And she's supposed to be the "moderate"? (nt)

[CO Liberal]

2. She's Being Realistic

Just yesterday, an asshole with an AK-47 went on a shooting rampage in Tyler, Texas. The Nuts Ruining America (NRA) and all those who opped the AWB extention have the victims' blood on their hands, INHO.

[RoeBear]

3. What will you have to say when

you find out the gun was manufactured before the AWB bill sunsetted?

[CO Liberal]

18. What Will YOU Say....

...when it turns out otherwise?

See? This is why I stopped going down into the Gungeon. Same old crap, day after day, week after week.....

[RoeBear]

24. Same old crap, day after day, week after week.....

But you're the one jumping to a conclusion that this was caused by the sunsetting of the AWB last year. It's up to you to prove it.

[CO Liberal]

30. These Killings Were Done By An Assault Weapon

More specifically, by an asshole with an assault weapon. An asshole who never should have been able to have access to that assault weapon, IMHO.

And as far as I'm concerned, anyone who worked for the lifting of the AWB (or voted for pro-NRA candidates) is partly responsible for those killings.

[lastliberalintexas]

38. You're right, he shouldn't have had access

to an assault weapon. Because he already had a felony conviction from what I understand- one for domestic abuse which kept him from *legally* acquiring any gun.

Glad that those gun "control" laws worked so well to prevent this tragedy. Yep, those laws are certainly worth losing elections over since they work so well at preventing crime. :eyes:


Gun control laws don't work any better than prohibition did to curb alcohol use or the "war on drugs" works to prevent pot use. Gun control laws don't do anything to address the real issues behind most crimes- poverty, no jobs/opportunity, little to no education, etc. I will never understand why otherwise progressive, liberal people want to allow the government to control another individual- particularly when that control does nothing to further the intent of reducing violent crime.

What would have done more in this instance would have been for this man and woman to receive therapy/counseling of some sort throughout the divorce proceedings. Although most lay people think that criminal law is the most dangerous to practice, family law violence far outpaces any other. This was a very foreseeable instance of violence which might have been prevented. But not by mere gun control laws- which were already on the books.

[CO Liberal]

47. Laws That Weren't Enforced

And the result is more blood on all pro-gunner's hands.

[lastliberalintexas]

50. Do you say the same about drug laws?

Do you honestly think that drug laws aren't being enforced? Is that why there are so many people who are able to obtain "illegal" drugs?


I am not pro-gun. I am pro-freedom of the individual. I noticed you haven't addressed any issues of freedom- care to try? Why would you take a conservative stance and allow the government that much control over an individual? How do gun control laws work any better than the prohibition laws? Do you honestly think that people will say "Oh, okay, the government says I can't own that particular gun, so I guess I won't try to buy it."? You do realize that the experts say that the best cure for the crime rate is a good and sound economy, right? That historically, crime rates are more tied to economic conditions than to any other single factor?


What would you have society do with the family court violence that occurs fairly frequently? And let me warn you in advance that the only time I have ever been evacuated from a courtroom was when a man was brandishing a common pocketknife at his soon to be ex-wife ando thers of us in her vicinity, so please don't just say that more and better *gun* control laws are necessary.

[CO Liberal]

52. Bullshit

There are far too many guns out there. Period.

And don't give me that personal freedom crap. No one has the right to blow away another person.

[lastliberalintexas]

53. CO, I know you're smarter than that

"No one has the right to blow away another person."

Correct, and there are criminal laws which address that very act- whether the "blowing away" is done by gun, chemical explosion, etc. I've never seen anyone assert that those laws should be taken off the books, so I am not quite sure why you brought that issue into the discussion of gun control.

But what you are advocating is that the government be able to prevent someone from purchasing a gun *before* a crime is committed- you are advocating that the mere possession of the gun become the crime. I know you can see the difference.



Sorry that you don't care to actually address the issues, and instead will only assert that there are too many guns. I can see that you don't like guns- I actually don't either. I don't own any, and I won't let any be kept in my home. But just as with other things (like abortion, drugs, etc.) I would never presume to make that choice for someone else. So we'll have to agree to disagree on this.

But I would like to ask this again, since I've never received a response from any gun control advocate. I worked for Jack Brooks, a fairly liberal Congressman from Texas. He was very good on labor, choice, and other issues important to us liberals. However, he also had an A rating from the NRA and didn't believe in gun control. Henry Hyde, on the other hand, was the deciding vote in committee to keep the gun control provisions into a crime bill primarily authored by Brooks (his vote was against Brooks, might I add). Who do you prefer- Brooks or Hyde? I ask because I often get the distinct impression from gun control advocates that many would prefer Hyde- the racist, anti-choice homophobe that he is. Just because Brooks is "pro-gun", whatever that means. So, of the 2, which would you prefer to have in Congress?

And so you know, we lost Brooks in the 1994 massacre, and his defeat was in large part due to that very gun control legislation- many of the races we lost in the South that year were due at least in part to that issue. While that is not the reason I believe our party is wrong on this issue, it does provide me with another reason to wish that we'd change the platform re: guns.

[CO Liberal]

55. And You're Advocating....

...punishing people after they kill someone. Closing the barn door after the horse runs away.

The 1994 massagre was NOT due to gun control - it was due to the Fairness Doctrine being done away with under Reagan and the rise of right-wing talk radio.

[Zhade]

74. What, they should be punished before they commit a crime?

Guilty before proven innocent? How very undemocratic and tyrannical.

[CO Liberal]

82. No

But like people have to be tested and licensed to drive a car (that can kill if improperly used), the same should apply to gi=uns. And those who should NOT have guns should be kept as far away from guns as humanly possible.

How many people have to die for YOUR "right to bear arms"???

[chickenscratching]

88. totally

it should apply to guns, but just because there are laws in place doesnt mean shit-----if someone really wants to kill somebody and blow them away, they'll do it. be it with a gun, by hand, or with a toothpick.
yes, laws would curb some freaks away from getting a gun-------but really, it's not treating the problem at hand at all. its treating a symptom.
when someone dies due to gun fire ask yourself about the reasons why that person had to die? was it because they were shot by a homicidal maniac?
who knows, but i don't often see the reason at hand being, "because proper gun laws wern't in place"

[Zhade]

98. I completely agree with your first paragraph.

The second one is just a straw man intended to incite, so I'll ignore it for the waste of space it is.

But your first point, duh. I agree. We're not really that far apart, I don't think.

[Name removed]

124. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lastliberalintexas]

119. Still no answer to my

Brooks v. Hyde query, eh? :o

[Name removed]

123. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

122. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

121. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[camaro3232]

138. WOW Do you know that people use guns for target shooting, hunting and comp

WOW Do you know that people use guns for target shooint, hunting and competition?

Do you know that there are laws against "blowing someone away"?

[chickenscratching]

87. i readily agree

i as well am not pro-gun, but as you said, similar to the "war on drugs" for example, laws against guns aren't going to stop people from obtaining a gun/using a gun/etc.
it's similar to abortion in the respect that we can't treat bans on guns as a solution because "if we don't see, it doesn't exist" . republicans would love to make abortion illegal, and as many of us know, despite laws, abortion would still continue.
it's the same with gun control, yes it may curb a few people on obtaining a gun, but for the real assholes out there, they will find a gun--resulting in the same problems that the law was supposed to combat.
we need to stop looking and treating the symptoms and instead go for the real issue at heart---ie, poor economy.

this is really trite, but guns don't kill people, people do. (sorry guys, i know that was lame)

[alwynsw]

106. I've checked my hands very closely.

No blood here.

It's called enforcement of existing laws.

[manly]

51. abbreviation

Please be so kind as to tell me what IMHO means.
Thank you.

[Merope215]

54. It means "in my humble opinion"

:hi:

[manly]

57. imho

many thanks for the explanation. I've been going nuts trying to come up with a possible meaning, and would have never thought of that.
thanks again.

[Merope215]

59. You bet!

And although I'm still a newbie myself, welcome to DU!

[camaro3232]

109. YOU YOU PEOPLE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT

These rifles that were used in the crimes you are talking about were not banned in the Assault Weapons Ban. They were legal during the ban. So it make no difference. Learn about the situation before you start blaming people and saying stuff that makes no sense. A gun is a gun. Does not matter if you make up names and call it an assault weapon or what ever. You would be much better off getting shot by and so called assault weapon than a big ass hunting rifle.

[camaro3232]

114. "These Killings Were Done By An Assault Weapon"

You say "More specifically, by an asshole with an assault weapon. An asshole who never should have been able to have access to that assault weapon, IMHO.

And as far as I'm concerned, anyone who worked for the lifting of the AWB (or voted for pro-NRA candidates) is partly responsible for those killings."


The democrats set it to expires in 10 years.So you are now putting the blame on us for the killings. pretty stupid

[einheit 13]

140. HOW DO YOU FIGURE THAT???

An assaualt weapon........what exactly is that?? Would it make you feel better if I assaulted people with a knife,or beat them to death with a bat?? I have alot of weapons and even a sect fire rifle,that IS legal and the ATF knows because they gave me the permission and approval to get it!Are you sure that the assault part isn't the individual and not so much the tools. If I ran over and killed 50 people with a truck is it now an "assault vehicle"?? What about drunk drivers?? More folks are killed by them then "dangerous weapons" every year.Should we brand them as "assault drunks"??OOOO, it can fire 30 rds without reloadind,so,I can do just as much damage with a single shot weapon.Citizens should not be able to own firearms with hi-cap mags.Well why should the police??Gun companies should be held liable.then shouldn't beer companies for selling a product that can impare a persons ability to operate??When a drunk driver kills an innocent victim shouldn't the beer company and vehicle manufacturer be held liable?? What about the police for not catching him/her.How about the place that sold them the booze?? If guns kill people and people don't, then can I blame my PENCIL for the mistakes I make while I'm writting??Just like guns in school or kids with guns,what about the parents??Hey lets blame it on EVERYTHING and EVERYONE except the guilty party.Oh I forgot,that poor sole was a product of society.Gimme a break.I fought in Somolia and got wounded, it ended my military career.Should I blame the military?? My country?? My government?? The man that sent me there?? Tell me whos fault it is!! No I blame myself for getting shot.OMG they have guns and they're coming towrds us,don't fire unless fired upon! Well when they fired upon us,guess what TOO LATE! So should I have shot them at first sight??I mean they had 2 pistols and 4 bolt action rifles!Not the dreaded "assault weapons" yall rant over.Took out 7 troops me included.But hours before we ran into 15 people armed with AKMs and SKS rifles that hold 10 to 30 rds but no one got hurt but them.So again AN "assault weapon" is merely a term yall made up to instill fear of a weapon for its looks and not so much for its use.

[RoeBear]

27. "This is why I stopped going down into the Gungeon. "

And I thought it was because you never won an arguement there.

[skippythwndrdog]

108. OK, then, Wayne, let's get an answer here...

Specifically, for each and every component, tell us what relation they have to crime.

1. Flash signature reducer
2. screw threads on a barrel
3. A folding, collapsing, or adjustable stock
4. A bayonet attachment point.

[Billy Ruffian]

112. no use, he's gone

Once a thread gets moved here, he stops participating.

[camaro3232]

120. ok ill try but they dont help criminals

these features do not help criminals.......


1. Flash signature reducer - a flash supressor only reduces the flash from the shooters point of view. With or without one there is still a muzzle flash. There are more for looks as you cannot even see a flash in the day and at night any gun will have a bright flash.
2. screw threads on a barrel- change compensators or muzzle breaks, or flash hiders. You dont need threads to put on a silencer.
3. A folding, collapsing, or adjustable stock- mostly for looks or storage. Only an idiot would shoot with the stock folded as they would have no control over the rifle. adjustable stock to adjust the length of the rifle to the users arm length
4. A bayonet attachment point.- just for looks. Why does someone need a baynet if they have a gun? Will offer a criminal no adavantage, I would rather have one charge at me with a bayonet then shoot at me. Bayonet charges only work if both sides charge. No ones going to chase anyone with a bayonet.

[Retired AF Dem]

6. Realistically going to cause us

to lose another election.

[CO Liberal]

19. Nope

People are learning that all they get from Republicans is lies, misery, and bullshit. We're on the way back, and Howard Dean will lead the way.

And once we're back in power, the AWB will be reinstated.

[Retired AF Dem]

72. "the AWB will be reinstated"

You have always stated you were for "reasonable" gun control. Thank you for confirming that reasonable to you means bans. Reasonable always means banning to us pro gun types.

[CO Liberal]

83. How Narrow-Minded a Way to Think

I'm not advocating the banning of ALL guns - just restrictions on certain types of weapons that have no place in the general population.

Like so many other pro-gunners, you read too much into what others say. That's why this issue may never be resolved - you've already decided what other people are thinking.

How sad, going through life as narrow-minded and wrong as you seem to me right now.....

[Retired AF Dem]

97. I don't consider myself narrow minded

in fact I believe us pro gun folks will lose in the end. Man kind is done evolving, the final stage is nothing but whining blubbering idiots that need their entire lives dictated to them from the Govt. I just hope and pray I'm dead before then. Yes it is truly sad that medical health care has derailed natures law of only the fittest shall survive.

[skippythwndrdog]

113. All one gets from the gun banners

is lies, misery and bullshit. Assault Weapons Ban...what a useless piece of crap legislation that had no effect and cost us big time. I now proudly state that Diane Feinstein is a POS who has no business being in the Democratic Party. She is repub-lite and anti-freedom to boot.

[jody]

10. If it was an AK-47, then it was not affected by AWB but covered by

the National Firearms Act, see
TITLE 26, Subtitle E, CHAPTER 53—MACHINE GUNS, DESTRUCTIVE DEVICES, AND CERTAIN OTHER FIREARMS

:hi:

[camaro3232]

21. AK clones were still legal under the Assault Weapons Ban

Thing is though new AK clones could legally be made and sold during the ban. So even if there was a ban that guy could still have bought an AK clone at a gun store. It didnt ban actual rifles, just features that they could have.

[NickB79]

31. So why was it legal for me to buy an AK clone all throughout the AWB?

They became MORE common in stores after the AWB was passed. Kinda defeated the purpose of the bill, wouldn't ya say?

[Massacure]

32. Would assholes go around on shooting rampages if everyone had an AK?

[stepnw1f]

66. Gee... Let's Find Out

It'll be an experiment.

[slackmaster]

33. Rifle used in Texas shooting would NOT have been covered by the AWB

Turns out it was a sporterized SKS that could be legally sold today EVEN IN CALIFORNIA. Just reading CO Liberal's rant makes me feel like going out and buying one today, although I already own a Chinese SKS.

...Initially, Arroyo's weapon was described as a Russian-made AK-47, which typically was illegal to buy or sell until September when the federal government lifted its 10-year ban on assault weapons.

Alexander said that, upon closer examination, Arroyo's gun was found to be a cheaper model, described as a semiautomatic SKS. It had been modified in a way that classified it as a "nonassault" or "sporting-type of weapon," which could have been obtained legally even before the ban was lifted. (Emphasis added.)

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/nation/10995968.htm?1c

But never let FACTS get in the way of a good knee-jerk gun-banning response.

[CO Liberal]

58. And Never let Bullshit Get In The Way of Logic and Reason

And logic and reason are two things the pro-gun position is totally devoid of, IMHO.

[slackmaster]

62. CO, you're the one who said blood is on peoples' hands

For allowing the AWB to expire.

But this incident had nothing to do with the expiration of the AWB, nor has there been any negative effect on public safety because of its planned demise. There is no logical or reasonable connection between the end of the AWB and this tragic incident.

My opposition to the AWB and all proposed revisions of it are based on logic and reason. If you don't agree then so be it, but please don't try to paint my position as illogical or unreasonable. I think yours is driven primarily by emotion, and you seem eager to accept misinformation (e.g. the weapon was an AK-47) if it supports your gut feelings. That's fine, but I don't appreciate people implying that my position, which is actually pro-choice not pro-gun, is devoid of logic.

[CO Liberal]

78. And I Don't Appreciate...

...pro-gunners dismissing my opinion because they say it's based on emotion. Actually, it's based on a hop of making this a better world, and I believe this would be a better world if fewer people felt the need to pack heat.

[slackmaster]

80. I have no problem with emotion-driven views

I do have a problem with public policy with no logical underpinning.

[CO Liberal]

81. And I Have a Problem...

...with public policy that's bought and paid for by the fucking NRA - like the lifting of the AWB.

[slackmaster]

84. The AWB wasn't lifted by anyone

It expired all by itself, automatically, by design. Without the sunset clause it never would have passed in the first place.

I have to keep returning to this thought - The AWB has been expired for more than five months now, and AFAIK there has not been a single spectacular, unusual crime committed with a weapon that would have been covered by the ban.

Why do you suppose that is, CO?

BTW - Lots of us who do not march in lock-step with the NRA recognize the folly that was the AWB. The fact that the NRA likes something does not necessarily mean it's a bad thing. Why allow the NRA to decide your position on the matter? That gives them a lot of power they don't deserve.

[CO Liberal]

92. We All Have Our Personal Enemies

While many pro-gunners prefer to demonize Sarah Brady and Congresswoman McCarthy (two women who have suffeerred personal thanks to asshoiles with guns), I prefer to demonize the true assholes - the NRA leadership, particularly Wayne "Asshole in a Suit" LaPierre and Ted "Shit for Brains and Shit in His Pants" Nugent.

[Name removed]

126. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

125. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[chickenscratching]

89. how would bans fix peoples "need to pack heat" ??

again, ask yourself why people are living in fear? because our economy sucks? because the news media is totally screwed up, biased, and implements fear into all of us?

[Zhade]

75. Here, you must have missed the salient point...

Alexander said that, upon closer examination, Arroyo's gun was found to be a cheaper model, described as a semiautomatic SKS. It had been modified in a way that classified it as a "nonassault" or "sporting-type of weapon," which could have been obtained legally even before the ban was lifted. (Emphasis added.)

This should now be clear to you: the AWB had zero effect on this case. Your argument's premise is flawed.

[CO Liberal]

79. I Find the Entire Pro-Gun Position Fatally Flawed

And innocent people are the ones paying the price for people who just HAVE to have guns.

[Zhade]

99. That has nothing to do with the flawed argument you put forth.

Your argument was that the AWB would have prevented this death. It has been demonstrated to you that the AWB had zero to do with the guns in this case.

You want to argue about other aspects, cool. Just realize that the AWB was flawed and pretty much useless. Enforcing the laws we already have is a far better idea than further banning guns, especially when those bans are ridiculous and politically costly like the AWB.

[camaro3232]

139. blame the 2nd amendment

Of course you can have an opinion but the 2nd amendment allows anyone (if they are not a felon) to own a gun. If we didnt own guns we would not have won the revolution and formed this great country. The are essential to keeping the people free. There are many problems in the U.S. besides gun crime. More people are accidently killed by a doctor or killed by cars. But our country is still the one of the best and safest places on earth

[RoeBear]

4. Barbara Boxer = Knight in shining armor

Diane Feinstein= Don Quixote

[Walt Starr]

5. This is one issue I am diametrically opposed to my party on

I support the second amendment completely.

[Todd B]

9. Meh, the second amendment doesn't mention military style assault rifles.

The second amendment doesn't mention the right to military style assault rifles, IMO.

Furthermore, the second amendment specifically mentions well-regulated militias - it doesn't mean Average Joe from down the street has a right to an AK-47 whenever he feels like it.

I support Feinstein completely - I always thought it was a bad thing when Bush let the ban lapse without resigning it. In my opinion, all assault weapons are good for are to compensate for something else, if you get my drift.

[jody]

12. The Second Amendment doesn't mention firearms at all, it says "arms".

In a seminal case on the Second Amendment, SCOTUS noted:

UNITED STATES v. MILLER, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)

QUOTE
In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense. Aymette v. State of Tennessee, 2 Humph., Tenn., 154, 158.
UNQUOTE

QUOTE
The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.
UNQUOTE

Following SCOTUS' observation, the "unorganized militia", consisting of about 100 million men and women, when called to duty by the governor of their states, is expected to report with either a M-16 rifle and/or M-9 pistol supplied by themselves. The M-16 rifle and M-9 pistol are standard arms in common use by U.S. armed forces.

[Retired AF Dem]

13. No

what is your drift? I'm sure it will be childish.

[RoeBear]

26. Congratulations!!!

You're the first poster to refer to 'penis' in this thread about guns!
(and in just the ninth message too)

Hey Don Pardo! What do we have for our winner?

[jody]

28. Now RoeBear, I was going to let that post pass but, now I must add this.

"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity" - Sigmund Freud, "General Introduction to Psychoanalysis"

Ballistophobia 1. The fear of bullets. 2. The fear of ammunition. 3. The fear of guns

:hi:

[RoeBear]

29. The referee might throw a flag at you...

...for piling on. :P

[solinvictus]

60. The First Amendment..

didn't mention the Internet, topless bars, or performance art either, so what's your point?

[benEzra]

115. The AWB didn't cover actual military weapons, either...

The second amendment doesn't mention the right to military style assault rifles, IMO.

Furthermore, the second amendment specifically mentions well-regulated militias - it doesn't mean Average Joe from down the street has a right to an AK-47 whenever he feels like it.

Please get informed about Federal firearms law.

Actual military-type infantry rifles, which are automatic weapons, are heavily restricted by the National Firearms Act of 1934, which has only been on the books for, oh, 71 YEARS now...

Feinstein's ban halted the production, but not the sale, of

--practically all firearms with magazines holding over 10 rounds, like the pistol your local police officer carries on her hip, thereby raising prices on standard-capacity pistol magazines (pre-1994 magazines were exempt, so the ban didn't significantly affect rifle magazine prices);

--all self-loading civilian firearms with two or more of a list of naughty features, like a rifle with the stock shaped a certain way (pre-1994 firearms exempt);

--decreed that 19 scary names may not be used when marketing firearms to non-LEO civilians (pre-1994 firearms exempt).

Contrary to popular belief, it did NOT ban any automatic weapons, military AK-47's and Uzi's, or whatever. Those were and are already restricted by the National Firearms Act.

[Name removed]

127. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

128. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ENTSETZEN]

145. Because back then.....

There were no such things as "military style weapons",these are modern inventions.From 1864 till 1999 my family had in its possession a 12pound rifled field gun that belonged to the CSA and the unit many of my kin folks served in.We sold to a Northern group that competes with these weapons every year.

At the end of WW1 my great grand father had in his possession a LEWIS machine gun and a crappy French Sho-Sho machine gun,that are currently in my gun safe and fully operable.After the end of WW2 my grandfather brought home a G43rifle and a Russian Deregytev(sp)machine gun.In 1946 he purchased a Browning BAR for $50.My cousin has these in his safe.From Viet Nam my late uncle brought home 2 SKS rifles and obtained through trade with other vets a SVT sniper rifle and a Tiger sniper rifle.these are in my safe as well.

So the second amendment cannot stop us from obtaining the same weapons the military has,the gov. can only limit the types.Now about the well formed militia....thats why we have the National Guard.In almost every state any group of people that come together for practice of military type training tend to get branded as radicals and either shut down or the gov finds some way to show that they have broken some kind of law and are jailed.

Now while on the bill of rights,does this mean that the freedom of press and media should no longer exist because of modern technology ?? Its the same exact thing just on another very real topic.

[jody]

7. Feinstein is a major obstacle to Dems winning in many states.

The AWB needs to be taken out of our party platform. :mad:

[u2spirit]

41. Ding Ding Ding!

we have a winner

[mermaid]

8. Well, Perhaps A Little Ammo Here For Feinstein

Just the other day, outside the Smith county Courthouse in Tyler, Texas...a man killed his ex-wife and one other person...and injured four others..including a D.A. and a cop...in an apparent dispute with his ex-wife over the divorce/custody proceedings. among those injusred was his own son.

I might mention the gunman was later killed in a high-speed chase. The gunman was wearing a bulletproof vest...and his weapon?? A FUCKING AK-47!!!!

[jody]

11. An AK-47 is not covered by AWB. See #10 reply above. n/t

[Baclava]

14. You Do know there are semi-auto AK's?

That are sold legally / In every state? / and they have NOTHING to do with an AWB?

(Where is the Gungeon when we need it?)

[Retired AF Dem]

15. AWB had every thing to do

with semi auto ak's and other semi auto rifles. Reports from TX is saying this was a real AK-47, full auto which was never covered by the AWB.

[Baclava]

20. I meant the Cali AWB was about purely cosmetic features...

..but if it was a full-auto AK used in Texas, then it would've been illegal to own without a Class III license anyway...

Many gun-control laws have less to do with protecting public safety than with disarming the citizenry and exalting the government.

The policy reflects a philosophy that sovereignty belongs to the government rather than to the people...which is just the opposite of what the Constitution says.

[jody]

16. You are correct if you mean "AK-47 look alike", but an "AK-47" is a select

fire assault rifle and covered by the National Firearms Act.

[hack89]

17. self deleted

[camaro3232]

22. full auto aks

Yea mostly all AKs are semi auto. There are some legal full autos in the US but theyll cost upwards of $10,000

[slackmaster]

34. Wrong, wrong, WRONG

...a semiautomatic SKS. It had been modified in a way that classified it as a "nonassault" or "sporting-type of weapon," which could have been obtained legally even before the ban was lifted....

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/nation/10995968.htm?1c

[einheit 13]

142. SKS?????

The SKS has always been a semi auto.........get educated.one trigger pull one shot! Oh you can "bump" fire it or any other SELF LOADIND SEMI AUTO WEAPON.Sure you can modify the trigger group to make it full auto,BUT IT WON"T STOP TILL ALL THE AMMO IS SHOT OR YOU HAVE A MISSFIRE!

[slackmaster]

157. I know the SKS is and has always been semiautomatic

I've owned one since 1988.

WTF are you talking about? I was quoting an article which contradicted a claim that the rifle was an "AK-47" or a "machine gun".

:shrug:

[RaggedClaws]

131. You do realize...

...a man killed his ex-wife and one other person...

You do realize that that "other person" was a law-abiding citizen licensed to carry a concealed weapon, and that he heroically put himself in harm's way to stop the attacker? The attacker was wearing multiple layers of body armor, so the handgun shots didn't faze him, and he ended up executing the man.

His name was Mark Wilson and he was a plain old citizen exercising his constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.

If it wasn't for him, there would've likely been many more dead. Just thought you should know that the 2nd amendment is for all of us, don't just focus on the nutjobs. There are many many more law-abiding citizens legally owning firarms than there are crazies, criminals, and the like. Keep it in perspective.

[ENTSETZEN]

148. HOOYA-HOOYA-HOOYA!!!!!!!!!

[jody]

23. Info link below from a credible source re AK-47.

Wikipedia "AK-47"

[Senator Lamb]

25. we need to drop the issues of guns

now im not one of those DLC'ers advocating a move to the right, if fact im very against that. I want populism in our economic policies and liberalism in our social policies.

However, my position of abortion, gays, and guns are tied in to the belief that government should stay out as much possible. I agree with Dean and Feingold on guns. I believe in the maximum liberty for citizens of this country.

As long as we are for gun control we will lose our chances in the west, especially among independents, paleocons, and libertarians who may be fed up with the repuke policies.

[lastliberalintexas]

40. Advocates of gun control are actually

the conservatives. On that one issue at least. The traditional foundations of liberalism require us to support the rights of the individual above that of the government- the Jefferson vs. Hamilton split of the founding fathers.

It's ironic, because many of the same advocates of gun control would probably be in favor of legalizing at least some drugs like marijuana, even though the reasons for the war on drugs can be considered just as valid as those arguments espoused by the gun control advocates.


It's also what lost us the South, at least initially. Yes, now there are all the BS moralistic issues involved too. But the big turning point was 1994, and we lost because of the Omnibus Crime Bill and the gun control provisions it contained.

[shadowknows69]

35. not to go against the party line or anything

But I suspect that it might be a good thing if our populace is as well armed as it can be at least some of the more enlghtend truly patriotic members of it. Who knows when we mught have to fight off a well armed occupying force in this country.

[Laurab]

56. I'm not at all fond of guns personally but couldn't agree more

Really, I have no strong feelings either way about guns or gun control. I do think anyone who wants a gun is going to get one, I don't know why anyone actually needs an AK47, but if they want one, they're going to get one legally or illegally.

It's not a huge stretch of the imagination to think that someone might occupy our country, the way we enjoy occupying other people's countries. Or, maybe it'll be a civil war. In that case, I think I might learn to appreciate guns a whole lot more.

[chickenscratching]

90. like republicans vs. dems? i'm suprised ...

that there hasn't been any casualties as of yet...but i do know, i will be armed and ready when the reds come, Civil War II.
yes!

[slackmaster]

36. Her personal agenda is acting as a wedge against her own party

Shame on her.

It's been more than FIVE MONTHS since the AW ban expired and there is no sign of the predicted wave of violent acts being committed with weapons that were covered by the ban.

[jamesinca]

37. The stupid DINO must be up for re-election

I take that back, the malignant bitch is up for re-election and I think she is playing on the murder of, I believe Milk and Moscone. If only she could have made such a principled stand against Condi. Enough of Feinstein, she sickens me.

[slackmaster]

39. She lost me on a data encryption issue several years ago

She and then-FBI director Louis Freeh introduced a bill that would have made it a crime for anyone to send via phone or Internet a message encrypted in a manner that could not be cracked by the federal government.

Talk about a distortion of the Interstate Commerce Clause.

:argh:

[u2spirit]

42. I can tell you for an almost certainty

that the AWB has killed us dems in the red states. Here in wingnut Oklahoma, I know many people who agree with many things on the democratic platform, but refuse to vote dem because of the gun issue. It's a drag on our party. Let me state for the record that I am not a big fan of the 2nd amendment, do not own a gun and feel like most gun nuts are over the top. However, the AWB doesn't solve any real problems associated with gun violence and has only given Joe six pack the idea that dems are weak.

[yorgatron]

43. DiFi= world's biggest hypocrite

she has a CCW to carry a pistol.

[CarinKaryn]

68. I call BS on YOU

Either back up your statement, or retract it. And I don't mean back it up with some bs fantasy from the NRA or slackmaster.
Show us proof of your statement or retract it.

[solinvictus]

69. Here you go, from 1996

"Permission to Pack
More than a million Americans are ready to deal lethal force. And
they're licensed to do it. Handgun permits are getting easier to come by
- --even in L.A.
By PAUL DEAN, TIMES STAFF WRITER

Los Angeles Times Thursday January 4, 1996
Home Edition
Life & Style, Page 1
Type of Material: Top Story; Main Story
===========================================
Permits to carry concealed handguns have been issued to Howard
Stern, Donald Trump, Sen. Dianne Feinstein and William F. Buckley. Each
came loaded with accusations of official pandering to the clout and cash
reserves of their celebrated recipients.

In apparent conflict with his newspaper's gun control editorials,
Arthur O. Sulzberger, chairman of the New York Times, has been licensed
to carry a .38 revolver. As have several millionaires, many judges, a
wise guy or three, union bosses, two Rockefellers and Tom Selleck.

"These people think it's wrong for everyone else to carry a gun, but
think it's OK for them to carry a gun," protests California attorney Don
B. Kates Jr. "It is telling the public: Your life is not important. Our
lives are."

Americans seem to be saying something else: What's good for the well-
connected ought to be good for all.

And in state after state, legislatures are returning to the open gun
laws of America's Colonial and territorial infancies with concealed
weapons permits virtually for the asking. For about $50, a photograph
and fingerprints.

More than half the states now license citizens to carry concealed
weapons. That's 1.5 million Americans ready to deal their own lethal
force, instead of dialing 911. Even in Los Angeles, long a leader of
hard-nosed handgun restrictions, things are softening.

Credit lawyer Kates, veteran pursuer of human and constitutional
causes, who last year filed a suit against the City of Los Angeles on
behalf of ordinary residents refused permits to carry concealed weapons.
He was joined by other attorneys, identical suits and similar clients.

All won. And in August, after two decades of virtual nonissuance, the
uncelebrated electrician, realty agent and toilet paper maker were
issued one-year permits to travel Los Angeles with loaded pistols under
their jackets or in their purses."

[CarinKaryn]

85. Still BS

9 year old story about a nutjob lawyer who's sueing so MORE people can have hidden guns in churches and supermarkets. Story contains no proof of your claim.

Please ask the mods to delete your slam against Sen Feinstein.

[jody]

86. What is your problem? Feinstein has never denied that she once

carried a handgun, presumably legally with a CCW.

The following comments were made by U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) during U.S. Senate hearings on terrorism held in Washington, D.C. on April 27, 1995:

"Because less than twenty years ago I was the target of a terrorist group. It was the New World Liberation Front. They blew up power stations and put a bomb at my home when my husband was dying of cancer. And the bomb didn't detonate. ... I was very lucky. But, I thought of what might have happened. Later the same group shot out all the windows of my home."

"And, I know the sense of helplessness that people feel. I know the urge to arm yourself because that's what I did. I was trained in firearms. I'd walk to the hospital when my husband was sick. I carried a concealed weapon. I made the determination that if somebody was going to try to take me out, I was going to take them with me."

Feinstein recognized then as informed people know today that the government is not required to protect an individual, senators excepted of course. Under those conditions, she had a choice of being prepared to defend herself or submitting to criminals, IMO she wisely chose to defend herself by carrying a handgun.

Why don't you present facts from Feinstein that refute the summary I made above. :shrug:

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jody]

104. The overwhelming majority of Dems in my state support

our state constitution that says: "That every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state" and "That this enumeration of certain rights shall not impair or deny others retained by the people; and, to guard against any encroachments on the rights herein retained, we declare that everything in this Declaration of Rights is excepted out of the general powers of government, and shall forever remain inviolate."

Don't you know that Clinton and Gore both state that the perception that Dems are gun-grabbers cost us the last two presidential elections?

Don't you know that the revised AWB proposed by Feinstein and Brady would ban essentially all semi-auto firearms?

Don't you know that SCOTUS said that states can require the militia, that means both organized and unorganized, to "appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time"?

Don't you know that the "unorganized militia", consisting of about 100 million men and women, and according to SCOTUS when called to duty by the governor of their states, is expected to report with either a M-16 rifle and/or M-9 pistol supplied by themselves. The M-16 rifle, an automatic rifle, and M-9 pistol, a semi automatic pistol, are standard arms in common use by U.S. armed forces.

Don't you know that SCOTUS has said governments are not required to protect an individual? That means protection is self defense, so what tools do you plan to use?

Are you in denial?

[Billy Ruffian]

107. There are lots of gun owning Dems

My state elected a Dem governor, Lt. Governor, and took control of the state house and Senate.

They did go for Bush, and put a rethug into the senate, but that might have something to do with the choices.

[benEzra]

116. Yep...

the Dem senate candidate (nationally known Erskine Bowles) was a vocal advocate of the Feinstein ban, made it an issue in his campaign, and LOST even as other, pro-gun, Dems swept the state (except for the pro-AWB presidential ticket).

[einheit 13]

141. Feinstein is a joke............

she carries a .38 S&W snubby with her almost all the time. She is a hypocrite.

[alwynsw]

133. Want your crow now, or for dessert?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diane_Feinstein

<snip>Feinstein is a strong proponent of gun control, yet is known to have carried concealed handguns herself with a normally hard-to-obtain California carry permit - few people, other than politicians and celebrities, are able to obtain California CCW permits. At one time, she was the only person in San Francisco to possess a concealed carry permit.

Try Google. It works!

[slackmaster]

134. I've heard it's not too bad if you use enough Tabasco

It's not a "slam" against Senator Feinstein to point out that A) She has carried a concealed handgun for self-defense, and B) She maintains a different set of standards for herself than for others.

I know someone might point out that public figures are special people, but her life is not worth more than anyone else's.

[alwynsw]

135. Wanna bet a nickel on how long it takes to get a reply and retraction?

C'mon. You can have anything under 168 hours.

[slackmaster]

136. I'm betting on something like...

"It doesn't count because it happened before she was a Senator", or

"Wikipedia is a right-wing source created by a Libertarian who's never even been to Hawaii", or

"Robb is a dingbat".

[alwynsw]

137. My money is on

a plain ol dingbat reply of some stripe.

[CarinKaryn]

149. What a crock!

:wtf: Wikipedia? :wtf: That's the best you can come up with? :dunce: The encyclopedia self edited by who ever the heck wants to? :wow:
I could literally put ANYTHING in Senator Feinstein's entry, ANYTHING.
I can't believe what a piss-poor, weak-ass, complete LOSER reference this is. I'm embarassed I'm even responding to it. :puke:
And then you sit around congratulating yourself for finding this "proof"?!?!? :wow:

[benEzra]

150. Going to dismiss these as well?

David Evanier, "Profile of a Centrist Democrat," Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, September 29,2000, http://www.jewishjournal.com/archive/09.29.00/politics.09.29.00.html

Elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in l969, Feinstein experienced a series of catastrophic events, vivid examples of ideological fanaticism turned into violence and madness. Black Muslims engaged in a spree of random murders and shootings of white people in 1973; the Symbionese Liberation Army kidnapped publishing heiress Patricia Hearst in 1974; the New World Liberation Front (NWLF), an underground terrorist group, began a campaign of intimidation and terror against Feinstein and other supervisors in 1975.

The NWLF placed Feinstein's name on a death warrant as "a dog to be put to death." Two of Feinstein's colleagues received candy boxes filled with dynamite at their homes. The campaign of terror came to a climax when Feinstein's 19-year-old daughter Katharine found a bomb planted in the window box of her room. Feinstein got a permit and learned to shoot at the police academy. She started packing a .38 caliber pistol in her purse.

Paul Dean, "Permission to Pack," Los Angeles Times, Jan. 4, 1996, at E1

Sen. Dianne Feinstein obtained her permit in 1976 when she was president of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and a bomb exploded against her house.

"I was a victim of the New World Liberation Front," she recalled.
"Then they shot out the windows of our beach house."

Although a supporter of tough gun laws, Feinstein believes citizens should be granted permits to carry concealed weapons if there is "a demonstrable need."

Her own license has lapsed.

[CarinKaryn]

151. Yes, those are much better cites

Good work! :toast:

[slackmaster]

152. How about the San Francisco Chronicle?

Feinstein said her gun-control crusade stems from her own personal history.

In 1976, she escaped an attack by the New World Liberation Front, a group that had targeted prominent business and political leaders. The perpetrators placed a bomb at the door of her San Francisco home beneath her daughter's bedroom, but the detonator failed to work after the temperature dropped below freezing.

Later that year, terrorists shot out the windows of Feinstein's beach house near Santa Cruz. After she was told that her then-husband, Dr. Bert Feinstein, was terminally ill with cancer, she said she got a concealed-weapons permit and learned to use a pistol so she could protect herself at night when she went to see him in the hospital....

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/examiner/archive/1998/12/02/NEWS13851.dtl

[MrSandman]

153. CC's are so effective against bombers...

Ask the Israelis.

[davepc]

160. Because most Israelis are armed

Bombing is one of the few effective tactis the Palesitinais have open to them. Very hard to go on shooting rampages when scenes like this are not all-together un-usual.

[Retired AF Dem]

154. So the question is

salt and pepper, BBQ sauce, Tabasco sauce? A little red wine to wash it down with?

[slackmaster]

156. I made Tandoori quartered Cornish hens for a potluck last Friday

Co-worker from India gave me some da kine Tandoori masala powder. You mix it with fresh ginger and garlic and some yogurt and use that to marinade the bird parts for about a day, then roast them in a very hot oven.

I think if you bump up the cayenne pepper a few notches crow would taste pretty good prepared that way.

[alwynsw]

176. Face it. We'll have to save it for another day.

Anti's never admit to being wrong.

[slackmaster]

177. I have enough Tandoori Masala to make another batch

It'll keep in the refrigerator for a few months.

[benEzra]

155. Thanks (n/t)

[alwynsw]

143. Still waiting to take your order. n/t

[CarinKaryn]

158. Why do you want to force feed me crow?

The poster I called BS on still has not shown how the Senator is a hypocrite.
All your cites have proven is that there is documentation of a verified, credible threat against a public employees life, because of her work for the public. Don't you agree that if anyone should have protection, it should someone in her situation? She's not making up some fantasy about wanting to carry a piece in order to save school children from mad wolves or ninjas, TERRORISTS WERE TRYING TO KILL HER!

Do you now claim, in spite of all your previous blatherings, that a person in her situation should NOT be able to protect her family?

And while she did have a need for protection, what's wrong with restricting weapons to those who can demonstrate this need and have proven they can use them responsibly?

How does this make her a hypocrite?

Thanks, but no crow for me.

[slackmaster]

159. You replied to your own post, CarinKaryn

Did you threaten to force-feed yourself crow?

:crazy:

Don't you agree that if anyone should have protection, it should someone in her situation? She's not making up some fantasy about wanting to carry a piece in order to save school children from mad wolves or ninjas, TERRORISTS WERE TRYING TO KILL HER!

The difference between elites like Senator Feinstein and the rest of us mere mortals is that all she had to do was call the chief of the San Francisco PD and tell him she was being threatened, and her CCW permit was a done deal. An ordinary person, for example a woman who is being threatened by an estranged husband or boyfriend, who may be in just as much danger as Senator Feinstein was from "terrorists", would not receive the same treatment.

Do you think there aren't any regular folks in San Francisco who are being endangered by others? Do you know how many concealed-weapons permits the SFPD issues? There are a lot more of the former than the latter.

[slackmaster]

163. A coworker told me sparrow is actually pretty good

He ate some in an exotic Persian restaurant recently. He said they're kind of greasy and very, very small but tasty.

[goju]

161. Oh my

Sometimes I wonder whether the fumes from keyboards and monitors and such, might just "influence" reasoning ability, or honesty.

You called BS, then asked him to retract his statement if he couldnt "back it up" (or some school yard challenge). He did, as did others. Question, will you "retract" AND apologize, since you've been provided with everything you requested?


:think:

[MrSandman]

162. Called BS on the sources, too...

You called BS, then asked him to retract his statement if he couldnt "back it up" (or some school yard challenge). He did, as did others.

[jody]

164. You should learn how to lose gracefully.

We Democrats need to learn to compromise and fight together. I'm tired of losing elections to the neo cons. Let's kick Bush and his cabal out of office and then we can wrestle over things like RKBA that divide us.

Have a great day. :hi:

[CarinKaryn]

166. Not a chance

It sounds like you all are more interested in defeating Senator Feinstein than anything else.

I'm sure she and Senator Boxer have everyone's in the dudgon's full support (NOT).

[slackmaster]

167. Senator Feinstein needs to go for several reasons

War profiteering and a long history of attacks on privacy to name two.

[CarinKaryn]

168. IIRC, you are a CA resident

I guess you'll be working at outing the sitting Dem Senator in order to support her (presumably gun hugging) repugnent opponent.

Thanks for your support! :hi:

[slackmaster]

169. Nice try at character assassination

Here in California we have something called a "primary election" in which a party, e.g. ours, the Democratic Party, selects a candidate for office. I intend to work for an alternative Democratic candidate to replace DiFi in the primary. Try searching through other DU forums, e.g. Califonia and you'll find that plenty of good people here have serious problems with our Senator.

I think it's very inappropriate for you to attempt to smear me in this manner, CarinKaryn. Most of us can see clearly the false dilemma you tried to spin - Support Feinstein or you vote GOP indeed!

[Name removed]

170. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[davepc]

171. No other Democrat in the state of California..

who stands a chance at winning a state wide election?

huh?

what?

How do you figure that Diane Feinstein is the bright shining hope that stands between the Republicans and a senate seat from California?

Yes she wins re-election handily, and her constituents approve of her work for the most part, but to suggest that she, and she alone, is the only Democrat who stands a chance of winning....well...where the hell did you come up with that one?

[MrSandman]

172. Easier than arguing the point...nt

[Name removed]

173. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[beevul]

174. Trot that...

"strong Dem" label you just applied to the "good" senator up to GD or State & Country-Cal and see how well it flies. Don't forget a parachute.

C'mon. I dare ya. I double dog dare ya. (not holding my breath though)



Lets see...

She sold out on the Iraq War Resolution.

Condoleeza Rice (need I put a finer point on it?)

The tax cuts she supported (repuke tax cuts)

Big pharmaceuticals.

Defense contracts. (600 mil to hubbys firm)

Didn't protest the election.

Resurrects our image as the party of gun grabbers at every opportunity.



And yet YOU have the nerve to attempt to rake Slack' over the coals, while YOU pimp for repuke-lite just for anti-gun sake. Thats just precious.


Oh, I forgot. How thick of me. It's the D at the end of her name that matters, not the 'ino' that comes after it. That, and shes a gun grabber. Does that about sum it up?

Heres an old line...

Nice playmates you (and she) have there.

I eagerly await the almost-sure-to-follow accusation of slurring a Democrat (In Name Only).

Just make sure EVERYONE in GD and S&C-Cal whom are fed up with dino-fi get that same accusation while your at it, not just those that are pro-gun.

[MrSandman]

175. Can't refuse one of those, can ya?

C'mon. I dare ya. I double dog dare ya. (not holding my breath though)

[KingoftheJungle]

44. Democrats need to let this one go

The law was very poorly concocted for a threat that didn't really exist (something like 1% of gun deaths in the US are caused by assault weapons) and by pushing worthless gun control laws around we just further alienate a class of voters who might actually start to vote democrat if it weren't for our obsession with banning guns.

I say, force people to undergo background checks and a certification process to buy/possess guns. Don't BAN guns, it doesn't really work and it just pisses people off who might have otherwise voted for you.

[No Exit]

45. She's hand-in-hand with the neocons

as her husband makes millions through his controlling interest in the Perini Group, which is one of the scam-contractor-looters with lucrative contracts in Iraq.

[Paladin]

46. Behold The Gun Dungeon "Democrats"!

In all their malignant glory.

Trashing prominent Democratic politicians, bitching about the Democratic Party's not sharing their love of assault-style weapons, feverishly concentrating on the most esoteric and minute details of what supposedly constitutes an assault weapon, insulting DUers that dare to express a contrary viewpoint....you know, the usual.

Back to the Dungeon, guys.

[slackmaster]

48. Criticism of Senator Feinstein is not limited to the Gungeon

Or to "gun-related" topics.

Thanks for your "thoughtful" contribution, Paladin.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=141&topic_id=7567#7574

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1621372#1621418

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=141&topic_id=6993

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1618139#1619556

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=141&topic_id=7119#7172

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=141&topic_id=5855#7499

[lastliberalintexas]

49. I don't love assault weapons

I just don't like government control over the individual. On this issue, many so-called liberals actually fall in line with the Hamilton school of thought wherein the common person is feared and the government is in place to protect us from ourselves. That is the foundation of conservative philosophy, and I want no part in it. Personally, I am more of a fan of Jefferson's writings and beliefs concerning the importance of individual liberty and the supremacy of the common person (instead of a "protector" ruling class a la the federalists).

Gun ownership is simply one more issue of personal freedom and liberty for me. I do not own a gun myself, and have no desire to own one any more than I want to legalize marijuana just so that I can smoke it. I don't frequent the gun issues forum, I don't know the differences in weapons and which are covered by what law, and I don't care to do either. I just happen to be a *liberal* who understands the basis of our supposed belief system.


I do agree with one thing you at least implied. I wouldn't trash Feinstein over the gun control issues, either. Personally I think that there are plenty of other and better reasons to trash that "Democrat". :)

[solinvictus]

71. Feinstein has worked hand in glove...

Bankruptcy and tort "reform", Iraq, etc. etc. etc. This is the iceberg's tip.

[Name removed]

130. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jack_DeLeon]

61. Wow more of the same old bullshit...

The first AWB fucked our party over big time.

I guess she liked getting fucked.

I'm glad that my democratic congressman voted agaisnt it the first, time. He voted against the renewal, and I'm sure he will vote against this shit again.

[stepnw1f]

67. What's The Big Deal?

sniff sniff... something smells around here.

[slackmaster]

70. Republicans running both houses of Congress and the White House

Seems like a pretty big damn deal to me. Should we shoot ourselves in the foot one more time with this issue?

Senator Feinstein is letting her personal emotional issues dictate her policies, at the expense of our party winning elections.

I think that's a very big, very bad deal.

[hansolsen]

63. The AWB legislation has been a disaster. It has resulted in the sale of

more so called assault weapons, and has helped drive millions of traditional Dem supporters into the Republican column. Diane Feinstein is a one woman wrecking crew leading the Democratic Party off a cliff.

[Mr.Green93]

64. However

if we can get the AWB passed now the republicans will get the blame. And lose seats.

[benEzra]

117. You mean like in 1994?

When the SAME group of gun-404 authoritarians, led by Feinstein, rammed the over-10-round-gun-ban through? We see how well THAT worked out, don't we...

[madmom2005]

65. AWBaloney

Statistically speaking, assault weapons dont get used in many crimes. Totally agree with the sentiment that if we push this we are going to get clobbered AGAIN why bait the freakin NRA?

I mean do you intentionally go to the zoo, crawl over the fence and kick a grizzly bear in the ass?

Why the the hell do we keep on doing this?

I'll tell you why, we have strayed from our roots, this wouldn't even have been thought about, let alone done in the mid 60s. If you brought up such an idea at a precinct caucus you would get laughed out of the building.

Feinstein is one of my Senators and I think she has taken leave of her senses, if anything she is preparing for a run for CA Gov. & she doesn't give a fig about the national party.

Dean must be livid over this.

[jody]

94. "do you intentionally go to the zoo, crawl over the fence and

kick a grizzly bear in the ass?"

Well said. :thumbsup:

Anyone who wants to tar the Democratic Party once again with AWB and resurface memories of "Dems will take your guns" either (a) likes to lose political races or (b) they are doing it to keep we Dems as a vocal, minority to distract voters while neocons pass still more laws to move us toward a corporate, fascist state.

I for one am sick and tired of we Dems losing elections while our nation, the greatest experiment in democracy the world might ever see, is gradually destroyed.

Enough already, :mad:

[Zhade]

73. Fucking ridiculous. Does Feinstein WANT to lose voters?

What's wrong, Dianne? Too many drive-by bayonetings distracting you and your husband from counting the money he makes off the war you support and voted for?

We Californians need to replace this fool.

[jody]

76. If we didn't have divisive issues like RKBA, Rove would have to create

and fund them.

That's happening with same sex marriage, Ten Commandants, evolution, etc. The net effect is we Dems end up fighting over mundane issues while crooks masquerading as the people's elected representatives rob the country.

Rove laughs every time someone tells him how we Dems are fighting over the meaning of the Second Amendment.

[slackmaster]

77. jody has described the situation ever so concisely

That's happening with same sex marriage, Ten Commandants, evolution, etc. The net effect is we Dems end up fighting over mundane issues while crooks masquerading as the people's elected representatives rob the country.

Right on, jody! You made my morning.

:toast:

[Oldpals]

91. This issue drives me crazy

There is nothing more irritating to me than the gun control issue and those that cry immediately, once the mention of a ban on a needless yet deadly gun present in society today. All because of "their right" written during a time when you were likely to be scalped or killed by a wild beast. People have to start being rational and looking at this issue with common sense.There is nothing absolute about this amendment either and it is still up in the air where the constitution is concerned. In Iraq and Afghanistan they are confiscating the weapons such as the one in this thread. Why?

I grew up where the only guns allowed were for shotguns. Nobody was screaming when they banned rifles and handguns even though there was violence on a political level being committed just a few miles away. Common sense prevailed over selfishness. Now that the violence has all but disappeared there is nobody advocating returning to the days where the likes of the AK 47 or even less deadly hardware was available.

The USA with the most advanced society in the world in terms of industrial might and wealth ranks amongst the third world countries with respect to gun violence. It is ridiculous. As ridiculous as the slogan bandied about by the NRA, " Guns don't kill people, people kill people". Next breath you hear the uniformed using a parallel argument when someone mentions the banning of something else specific and the "great thinkers" break forth and exalt "what do you want to ban next; swimming pools? When will those that abhor the audacity of the majority living in the US and questioning "their right would be infringed upon"wake up and come into 2005? Time to start being rational about this issue and less emotional.
Those of us that like to live without the specter of the school and fast food restaurant filled with dead innocents are in the majority.
As has often been the case when discussing this issue " I will not go live someplace else since I dislike it". I'm in the majority. You, the apologist for the AW should pack up and go live elsewhere..maybe Afghanistan or Iraq? They have the same love for that very type of weapon.

[slackmaster]

93. Your last sentence shows that you are misinformed

You, the apologist for the AW should pack up and go live elsewhere..maybe Afghanistan or Iraq? They have the same love for that very type of weapon.

People in Iraq and Afghanistan are using real, selective-fire, military weapons. Nothing that was classified as an "assault weapon" by the defunct federal ban is used by any military force or insurgency anywhere in the world, because they can get the real thing.

[Oldpals]

95. Last post

stated that my argument had no merit since the insurgents were selecting the targets.
I never mentioned insurgents. The people that are having their guns taken are the same as you. They are not insurgents. The ban on the weapon does not discriminate.

[slackmaster]

96. I said "selective-fire" not "selecting the targets"

Further proof that you need to get informed about the terminology before attempting to engage in this discussion.

Selective-fire weapons are capable of discharging more than one round of ammunition per trigger pull. So-called assault weapons were by definition semiautomatic, and fire only one round at a time. The weapons being used in Iraq and Afghanistan would not have been classified as "assault weapons"; they were and are legally machineguns in the USA.

The assault weapons ban had nothing to do with machineguns.

[jody]

100. You raise an interesting point. SCOTUS has said

UNITED STATES v. MILLER, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)

QUOTE
In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense. Aymette v. State of Tennessee, 2 Humph., Tenn., 154, 158.
UNQUOTE

QUOTE
The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.
UNQUOTE

Following SCOTUS' observation, the "unorganized militia", consisting of about 100 million men and women, when called to duty by the governor of their states, is expected to report with either a M-16 rifle and/or M-9 pistol supplied by themselves. The M-16 rifle and M-9 pistol are standard arms in common use by U.S. armed forces.

The AWB could have been unconstitutional because it prevented a member of the militia reporting for duty with their own gun which would have included variants of the M-16 and M-9 with high capacity magazines.

[Factoid]

118. You're right - we need to repeal the 1986 ban.

Thank you for agreeing. :D

[alwynsw]

132. 1986, HELL!

Take it back to 1934 IMO!

[MrSandman]

105. ROFLMAO....nt

[Zhade]

101. If you have a problem with the RKBA, take it up with the Founding Fathers.

They're the ones who recorded our right to defend ourself in the Constitution.

[jody]

102. Were you replying to me?

[camaro3232]

111. NO ONE IN THE U.S. WAS EVER CHARGED WITH VIOLATING THE AWB

In the 10 years that it existed no one was ever charged with this bill. It doesnt fucking work. Make some gun control laws that actually do something. Get the gun out of the criminals hands. These guns are in the streets not in the gun stores.

[Name removed]

129. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ENTSETZEN]

144. Agreed....

But why not keep the criminals off the streets...........maybe some good 'ol street justice is just what this country needs!!!!

[camaro3232]

146. Yep, get out there and take the guns out of criminals hands its the only

way it will work. You can say "ohh you cant have that gun its illegal". It doesnt work like that. You need to be offensive. Put fear into them and have them thinking people are hunting them down.

[ENTSETZEN]

147. How do you know......

that some people aren't "hunting" them?!!???By hook,crook,discussion or death,a select few will protect their homes,families and neighborhoods.I am one of them.Police are a joke...a bunch of "Kowboys".Need a ticket or traffic control,they got it covered.Need good AGGRESSIVE law enforcement,take a number or become one!

[camaro3232]

165. agreed

I really do not see alot of people being arrested for illegal guns, and selling them