Feinstein going for another gun ban

I emailed all my representatives to let them know that I don't support this at all. Please, everyone else needs to write theirs.

http://www.house.gov/ You'll need your zip code with the plus 4 numbers to get your rep.
http://www.senate.gov/

No use writing Obama, he's in full support of eliminating the Second Amendment. If they can kill it before 2016 we're done with elections. Instead we'll have Dear Leaders.
 
purevilpleasure said:
Link to article please?

My glock and Ruger want to read it too.
Click to expand...

How about direct from the bitch's website? She had this ready to go and announced it 3 days after Sandy Hook. The timing kinda makes you wonder if the anti-gunners didn't decide to sacrifice a few kids to the cause, considering she says she worked on it for a year, and announces that it's done three days after?

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/pub...eases?ID=28d0c499-28ec-42a7-902d-ebf318d46d02
 
America: one of the greatest countries (i should really speak in past tense) in the World for having a system that is all about and for the people. It's a shame, Constitution has been getting nullified by the month ......at the same time, i blame the people even more, for letting politicians do what they do best. After-all, they work for us.

On another note, I like how they made sure to get the $200 fee in there for registering the gun. It's all about the money, nothing else.
 
you guys in lib states got it bad...I'm glad i live in a southern state...our pres is a Ruler who will never be a Leader
 
As much as I love my guns I'm torn on this issue. Technically these ar15's that you can buy at the local gun shop aren't really assuault weapons but at the same time they are.

Only thing they don't have is burst fire which is never used anyways. I can get an ar15, throw an Acog on it with a 30 round magazine and I have the same weapon I carried in Iraq. Has the same range and effectiveness. Can be fired quickly on semi.

But they shouldn't be banned regardless. Legal gun owners don't commit these acts.
 
My problem with the whole ban on guns, is that anyone killing kids or anyone else like that isn't following the law, so what will the law do.... Cocaine is illegal and it constantly finds its way into the country along with the illegal guns those types carry. The Swiss or swedes (can't remember which) issues everyone a hand gun at 18 and they have the lowest gun related crime rate of any country....
 
From the twit that has armed men protecting her. Same with NObama.
 
This wont pass. Gun ownership is part of the American psyche, weather politicians like it or not. Criminals have no regard for laws, creating another one will not be any different. Politicians that preside over states know if they support an "**** you and your guns and your whole lineage or guns" ban they can kiss there asses goodbye. They know this.

If you own guns or not, you know that right now you can purchase one to defend yourself, just having that ability in itself is a right. Taking such a critical element away from the constitution is political suicide. Next election the opposing candidate can be a homeless guy that says "I disapprove of Senator ****Stick's decision to take away firearms from the American people, and he would probably win.

Obamacare, meh. Gay rights, meh. The economy, meh. Those are all issues that cause quite an uproar when they are debated. Yet, they don't hold a candle to what the reaction would be with a weapon ban that is so offensive and comprehensive that it even forbids passing down grandfathered in weapons. You would seriously see state government's publicly opposing the idea, like slavery.
 
The problem is it passed in 1994, and this one is supposed to be more reaching. Plus, she's sponsoring a separate bill aimed specifically at high capacity magazines hoping that if one doesn't make it the other will. A difference in this bill vs the last one, the last one grandfathered banned weapons in while this one is supposed to require you to turn the guns you have over to the government and register, with pictures, the ones that are legal. Plus, there won't be any more passing your guns to your kids when you die, they have to go to the government at that time. The only thing I see keeping it from passing this time is Democrats who were in then remembering that they got their butts handed to them in the 1996 election because of their votes on the 1994 gun ban. I've written my reps already, I urge everyone else to do the same.
 
Upstairs Chris said:
This wont pass. Gun ownership is part of the American psyche, weather politicians like it or not. Criminals have no regard for laws, creating another one will not be any different. Politicians that preside over states know if they support an "**** you and your guns and your whole lineage or guns" ban they can kiss there asses goodbye. They know this.

If you own guns or not, you know that right now you can purchase one to defend yourself, just having that ability in itself is a right. Taking such a critical element away from the constitution is political suicide. Next election the opposing candidate can be a homeless guy that says "I disapprove of Senator ****Stick's decision to take away firearms from the American people, and he would probably win.

Obamacare, meh. Gay rights, meh. The economy, meh. Those are all issues that cause quite an uproar when they are debated. Yet, they don't hold a candle to what the reaction would be with a weapon ban that is so offensive and comprehensive that it even forbids passing down grandfathered in weapons. You would seriously see state government's publicly opposing the idea, like slavery.
Click to expand...


You need to come to The People's Republik. IMHO, there aren't enough legislators with enough of a backbone to oppose State run media. They will demonize gun ownership every night and the low-information voter will follow whatever the media tells them to believe. They will call for a ban because, "If one life is saved it is worth it!" I guess with a lower capacity magazine I will just have to reload more often! Never mind the banned weapons aren't the ones bad guys use! They should call this the Ugly Gun Ban! There is no such thing as an "assault weapon". EVERY gun is designed to kill or wound.

The purpose of the 2nd amendment isn't self-defense. It's about the citizenry being protected from the government!
 
Honestly, if they go after high capacity magazines like drum mags...Hell even if they go after 30 round mags and limit me to 10 or so I wont be too upset. Will that make any difference, no not at all, but I feel like that is about as far as this will go.
 
Upstairs Chris said:
Honestly, if they go after high capacity magazines like drum mags...Hell even if they go after 30 round mags and limit me to 10 or so I wont be too upset. Will that make any difference, no not at all, but I feel like that is about as far as this will go.
Click to expand...

ANY ban is too much. How much of your 1st amendment rights are you (or anyone else) willing to concede? How about the 4th? Or 5th? Or 10th?

Where does the erosion of our unalienable rights (NOT INalienable) end?
 
I understand, but if her bill does get mutilated and diluted as it passes through congress to the point where it limits the sale of magazines holding over 20 rounds. That would be a win for us, compared to the alternative.

I am not saying it is right by any means, but politics is going to work the way politics works, and no amount of caps lock hate on the internet will change that.


With that being said, I just fished writing my Congressman. As state troopers here, were have the luxury of having a good reputation with the people and are well respected by the state as a whole. I was sure to plug in my letter, what I do, and how even I think this legislation is an invasion of my constitutional rights and I do not approve what so ever.

I expect a response.
 
And I have one for you. Should this ban be watered down, the instant it is in place they will begin working on the next one and the next one. The anti-gun lobby stated in 1996 that their goal was the total elimination of private firearm ownership and they will not stop until they achieve it. Therefore, each time we give an inch we're giving them another first down on the football field. Do we finally stop giving in at the 10 yard line? The one yard line? Or do we let them go for the total ban they are after? I say don't give an inch, because each inch we give up must be fought for to get it back.

Personally I was satisfied with my pistol with the 17 round magazine, but since they started talking gun bans again I now posess far, far more than I did. Were it not for this impending gun ban, I would not have bothered because I really didn't need what I now have. Unfortunately now I do feel I need it. And I'll also point out that the current gun ban they plan to enact isn't just a ban on future sales, but a requirement that any firearms on the banned list to be turned over to the federal government or be charged with felony possession.
 
there is no question in my mind about the tragedy that place here , but the real issue here is Mental Health , not guns , this tragedy just gave the government the needed help to go after our guns , between the government and the media , they have all uneducated citizens up in arms about guns , namely AR's and AK's , but in reality the media never told the public the shootings were committed with hand guns , because the vast majority feel that there is no place for assault weapons in the hands of everyday citizens , please take the time and watch this video completely before you form any opinion Frank T

http://youtu.be/kOB6tNJ5nTU
 
Listen I am not promoting any erosion of my constitutional rights, but you have to be a realist. She is a bat **** crazy woman who threatens the constitutional right of all of us to own firearms. It's no secret she wants them all to be outlawed, but she knows she can't do that so she tries for her definition of "Assault Weapons". She will be unsuccessful but if her really constricting and inclusive bill gets chopped up and watered down to the point where it only affects our magazines, that's a win in comparison.

10 round magazines, or constant media onslaught demonizing guns, and bill after bill, after bill calling for gun reform until one is achieved....Your choice. I for one tell you that the latter, continuing over time, is more dangerous to our rights.

Also, if you want to make football references look at the whole picture. You consider each bill passed that limits our gun ownership abilities as a "first down". Well that 1994 legislation has been expired for some time now, and well, they haven't been able to bring it back since. So in reality, they have made no gains because the defense has pushed them back. Food for thought.

Also, I will reiterate, I would be surprised if anything other than possible small magazine legislation passes.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/05/politics/new-congress-gun-legislation/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Even CNN thinks so.
 
Upstairs Chris said:
10 round magazines, or constant media onslaught demonizing guns, and bill after bill, after bill calling for gun reform until one is achieved....Your choice. I for one tell you that the latter, continuing over time, is more dangerous to our rights.
Click to expand...

Been paying attention? That already happens. We lose ranges here because the State uses EPA lead laws to shut them down. Every legislative session here we have to fight yet another assault on our rights. If it's not a particular gun it's a magazine capacity. If it's not that it's a projectile's composition. If it's not that it's where you can buy a gun. The onslaught is never ending!

Remember, as The People's Republik goes, so goes the rest of the country.
 
Upstairs Chris said:
Listen I am not promoting any erosion of my constitutional rights, but you have to be a realist. She is a bat **** crazy woman who threatens the constitutional right of all of us to own firearms. It's no secret she wants them all to be outlawed, but she knows she can't do that so she tries for her definition of "Assault Weapons". She will be unsuccessful but if her really constricting and inclusive bill gets chopped up and watered down to the point where it only affects our magazines, that's a win in comparison.

10 round magazines, or constant media onslaught demonizing guns, and bill after bill, after bill calling for gun reform until one is achieved....Your choice. I for one tell you that the latter, continuing over time, is more dangerous to our rights.

Also, if you want to make football references look at the whole picture. You consider each bill passed that limits our gun ownership abilities as a "first down". Well that 1994 legislation has been expired for some time now, and well, they haven't been able to bring it back since. So in reality, they have made no gains because the defense has pushed them back. Food for thought.

Also, I will reiterate, I would be surprised if anything other than possible small magazine legislation passes.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/05/politics/new-congress-gun-legislation/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Even CNN thinks so.
Click to expand...

Yep, sometimes the ball moves in the right direction, so the beasturds have to redo their work. We really need to get those people out of office to begin with though. If we could get Reid, Pelosi, Boxer and Feinstien out of office we'd have a much better government provided they didn't get replaced with nastier versions of themselves. Either way, if they pass a magazine law I'll buy new magazines but my old hicaps are gonna fall in a lake on a fishing trip somewhere. They aren't going to be turned in.
 
This should be moved to the Any thing goes section it has nothing to do with LS's
 
pragmatic said:
This should be moved to the Any thing goes section it has nothing to do with LS's
Click to expand...

If the guns go, we become subjects to a govenment that both wants the little people to ride subways and bicycles and thinks confiscating things that they don't like is acceptable. One day you go outside and find your LS is gone, when you call the cops they tell you that the car was confiscated and crushed, and they will be having the cost to tow and crush deducted from your paycheck. If you don't say "Thank you sir, I'll stop worrying about it then." they ship you off to a reeducation camp. So it is related, in a bit. I did note in the first page that it was in the Anything Goes section, but this is important enough to run in other places.
 
Telco said:
If the guns go, we become subjects to a govenment that both wants the little people to ride subways and bicycles and thinks confiscating things that they don't like is acceptable. One day you go outside and find your LS is gone, when you call the cops they tell you that the car was confiscated and crushed, and they will be having the cost to tow and crush deducted from your paycheck. If you don't say "Thank you sir, I'll stop worrying about it then." they ship you off to a reeducation camp. So it is related, in a bit. I did note in the first page that it was in the Anything Goes section, but this is important enough to run in other places.
Click to expand...

That mindset is probably more diffusional then Feinstein herself.
 
Telco said:
If the guns go, we become subjects to a govenment that both wants the little people to ride subways and bicycles and thinks confiscating things that they don't like is acceptable. One day you go outside and find your LS is gone, when you call the cops they tell you that the car was confiscated and crushed, and they will be having the cost to tow and crush deducted from your paycheck. If you don't say "Thank you sir, I'll stop worrying about it then." they ship you off to a reeducation camp. So it is related, in a bit. I did note in the first page that it was in the Anything Goes section, but this is important enough to run in other places.
Click to expand...

Strip rights, disarm public, declare martial law, ship you off to a FEMA camp, where you drink the fluoridated water.

Not as hard as some people think, all systems are in place if you look.

/conspiracy :shifty:
 
if a rifle were illegal there are a million other ways the guy could have killed the kids. steal a car and run them over at the bus stop, hand out poisoned candy for trick or treat. guns dont kill people. in fact, people with guns can prevent crime. if the teacher and the teacher's aide and the teacher next door and their aide each have a handgun, the guy kills maybe 3 people instead of 20+.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 157 (members: 2, guests: 155)
Back
Top