• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Feinstein's at it again

KYGlockster

Activist Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2010
Messages
1,842
Location
Ashland, KY
I should've placed a bet. I said yesterday that she would have a bill introduced before the week was over to strip us of more of our firearm rights. This woman is an evil, manipulative, insidious dictator! It is a shame that people elect individuals like her to represent them, when all she wants to do is destroy every individual right (the ones that won't further her insidious agenda) we have and control the entire population. The fact that she keeps getting elected is completely repugnant!

Millions of gun-owners like myself own numerous firearms that have pistol-grips; 30, 60, or 100 round magazines; flash-hiders; and on and on, yet we do NOT use these items to commit crimes! By her logic, everyone that owns weapons that they call "assault" weapons should be a criminal, yet that is FAR from the truth.

I suggest we get tough on the criminals that use illegally purchased firearms to commit crimes, and stop allowing them to plea-bargain for sentences that do NOT fit the crime. If someone commits a violent crime with a firearm then they should spend the rest of their life in prison. We can't legislate objects and expect that to stop crime, but she knows this. We can't keep people in prison because people such as Feinstein claims that it is immoral and a violation of their rights! HHHmmmm... she wants to stop crime by making objects illegal, but she wants to get the people who commit the crimes free from punishment!? Does everyone see what this woman is really aiming for?

Gun control is NOT about guns at all; gun control is about the CONTROL.

Go AWAY Feinstein, you freedom-hating non-American!
 
Last edited:

Shoobee

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2012
Messages
599
Location
CCCP (Calif)
Now is the best time to deal with this issue because the Roberts' Court is 5-4 pro gun.

Might as well get it over with while Scalia is still on the court.

We already know the 3 babes on the court and the other guy from NYC will all 4 support assault weapons bans.

We don't know if the 5 who are pro 2A will or will not defend assault weapons.

Might as well find out now.

Note also that Diane said "the sale of" so anyone who has an AK-47 or an AR-15 should be safe because they will be grandfathered-in. Same as before.

In his heart Mitt agrees with her, he said so.

But her bill will probably die in committee.
 
Last edited:

Shoobee

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2012
Messages
599
Location
CCCP (Calif)
And we know that Obama will sign it. Reference debate #2. Elections have consequences.

Obama cannot sign what Boehner does not give him. We still have a divided government. And that is normally a good thing, when they can agree on important things, like cutting costs, and raising revenues, and no more tax cuts for the rich.
 

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
These idiots are arguing that they want to ban weapons that have military value ... in US v Miller 1939, that was the exact type of weapon the court said IS covered by the 2nd A.
 

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
These idiots are arguing that they want to ban weapons that have military value ... in US v Miller 1939, that was the exact type of weapon the court said IS covered by the 2nd A.

Which is odd because if that was true then we would be limited to "sniper rifles" and "machine guns."

I just find the conflicting legal ideas to be, a headache at best.
 

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,818
Location
Mulligan's Valley
You expected anything different from the "Wicked Witch of the West"?

Yep. We're talking about a psychotic, treasonous wanna be dictator who is voted in by some of the very worst people in our country. They've been enabling her **** for decades. Nothing new, nor surprising.
 

OC4me

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
750
Location
Northwest Kent County, Michigan
These idiots are arguing that they want to ban weapons that have military value ... in US v Miller 1939, that was the exact type of weapon the court said IS covered by the 2nd A.

+1

Scalia clarified that somewhat with a 'common' civilian use requirement. While he got it squarely wrong in my humble opinion, semi-autos have been in common use for about a century.

Black guns are certainly in common use nowadays and will continue to gain in popularity.

It is ironic that the threat to renew the assault weapons ban will greatly increase the demand and common use of these arms.

I am worried however that there may be a serious push for a so-called 'high-capacity' magazine ban.
 
Last edited:

Sig229

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Messages
926
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
What exactly is it about the far left that makes them so scared of firearms?
I never understood that.

You would think with all of the Mao Ze Dong, Stalin and Castro worship they would have learned that those communist "heroes" didnt win revolutions with paper signs and bullhorns. They did it with guns.

F'ing morons.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
What exactly is it about the far left that makes them so scared of firearms?
I never understood that.

You would think with all of the Mao Ze Dong, Stalin and Castro worship they would have learned that those communist "heroes" didnt win revolutions with paper signs and bullhorns. They did it with guns.

F'ing morons.
It's not the "gun", the gun is just the vehicle. It is about control, the libs hate folks who say NO to their nitwit ideology. They also know that if the victims of Mao Ze Dong, Stalin, and Castro had guns they likely would not have become victims in the first place.....libs hate that too.
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,221
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
The problem is OC, that Pelosi does not want to allow ANY "grandfathering" of the guns she wants banned. If she gets her way, there won't be ANY "hi-capacity" magazines NOR the guns that would use them!

I will simply hand them the lower receivers of my AR's (that are "on the books") and retain my other parts ..... as well as some particularly important parts that are not on the books in my name. All legal unless they start calling uppers "guns" for the first time. A great argument against gun registration and for private transfer if you still have that option in your state.

But it won't get to that. I doubt they can get this through in the first place and then the constitutional challenges will be even longer. Can you imagine the cost as they are constitutionally required to pay for any property they "take" and there are a hell of a lot of "assault" weapons out there these days.
 

FireStar M40

Regular Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
63
Location
U.S.A.
2 Pounds of Steel..

What exactly is it about the far left that makes them so scared of firearms? I never understood that.

I've always thought.. "If they're that scared of 2 pounds of steel :( , then they must be absolutely petrified :eek: when they see a automobile!" :rolleyes:

FireStar M40
 

Sig229

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Messages
926
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
I will simply hand them the lower receivers of my AR's (that are "on the books") and retain my other parts


F that!

I rather wrap the lowers up in greased soaked rags and plastic, then place them in waterproof containers and burying them out in some forest.
I will NEVER "hand over" any of my guns to anyone. If they got something to say about it, "I sold them face to face at a gun show years ago".
 
Last edited:
Top