Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: Assault weapon ban Thursday

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Battle Creek, ,
    Posts
    559

    Exclamation Assault weapon ban Thursday

    from http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/...ming-thursday/

    Black Thursday...

    Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s office confirmed that she will be introducing in the Senate Thursday a new version of the so-called assault weapon ban. A spokesman said the full text will be released at a press conference on Thursday.

    The California Democrat intends to expand on the ban that expired in 2004, by including handguns and shotguns, in addition to rifles. She would decrease from two to one the number of cosmetic features on a gun to have it be considered an “assault weapon.” This means that if a gun has just one item like a pistol grip or bayonet lug, then it is illegal. Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed into law the same ban in New York last week.
    CALL YOUR REPRESENTIVE AND VOICE YOUR OPINION ASAP!!!
    Last edited by Sheldon; 01-23-2013 at 01:00 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member linerider69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Louisburg
    Posts
    84
    Saw this posted it also it would seriously cripple the American people trying to defend their family and country from the tyrannical government that is in power now. People need to organize against the powers that be and let them know we won't just roll over for this.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Fear-mongering BS. So she's putting forward a Bill; she is anti-gun. Thank goodness it has no chance in hell-fire of passing.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Unknown
    Posts
    581

    Assault weapon ban Thursday

    Mitch McConnell is very close to compromising on the filibuster and may hand Harry Reid and crew uncontested rule in the senate.

    http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wo...tch-mcconnell/

  5. #5
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by palerider116 View Post
    Mitch McConnell is very close to compromising on the filibuster and may hand Harry Reid and crew uncontested rule in the senate.

    http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wo...tch-mcconnell/
    Close to the way it ought to be.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Unknown
    Posts
    581

    Assault weapon ban Thursday

    No.

  7. #7
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Close to the way it ought to be.
    And you said that when there was talk of the Republicans doing this as well; RIGHT???

    I also expect you have never read anything about WHY the founders set things up the way they did either? Never heard the analogy of the tea cup and saucer??
    Last edited by F350; 01-23-2013 at 11:57 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Battle Creek, ,
    Posts
    559
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Fear-mongering BS. So she's putting forward a Bill; she is anti-gun. Thank goodness it has no chance in hell-fire of passing.
    I sincerely hope you are right but can we afford inaction on our part, for caution is the superior virtue here.

  9. #9
    Regular Member skeith5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    357

    Re: Assault weapon ban Thursday

    I'm listening on cnn, trying not to throw up. They keep saying they want to respect the rights of legal gun owners. By taking away one of the best selling firearms? I think that speaks more than some biased poll...

    Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2
    Too lazy to do a blog! Follow me on Twitter instead! @6ShotScott

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Unknown
    Posts
    581

    Assault weapon ban Thursday

    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    And you said that when there was talk of the Republicans doing this as well; RIGHT???

    I also expect you have never read anything about WHY the founders set things up the way they did either? Never heard the analogy of the tea cup and saucer??
    This suspicion is shared by me. But no, she would be beside herself at a Republican monopoly.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    And you said that when there was talk of the Republicans doing this as well; RIGHT???

    I also expect you have never read anything about WHY the founders set things up the way they did either? Never heard the analogy of the tea cup and saucer??
    What they are debating about is not in the Constitution...or is it?
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  12. #12
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by Sheldon View Post
    I sincerely hope you are right but can we afford inaction on our part, for caution is the superior virtue here.
    this is Feinstein herself's methods, a psychological tactic, secretly assuring the people that it will not actually pass, giving us confidence in it not passing, effectively causing us to not put effort into ensuring it doesnt pass, which in turn gives it a better chance of passing.

    berettachic = feinstein

  13. #13
    Regular Member Mattimusmaximus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hillsboro
    Posts
    261

    Assault weapon ban Thursday

    I concur I watched as they said it looks like its surly not to pass.. But it's a tac-tic to get us comfortable.. I read what they are doing in New York an it sickens me.. Not to sound like a conspiracy nut but along with this I heard from some friends in the military whom don't want to be named that those who won't fulfill there contract by "defending our country foreign or DOMESTIC" are being let go. Just cause shooting our own people is hard to do.. Any way no need to reply I'm working on uncovering that one myself


    -Matt of Hillsboro OR-

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Unknown
    Posts
    581

    Assault weapon ban Thursday

    Quote Originally Posted by Mattimusmaximus View Post
    I concur I watched as they said it looks like its surly not to pass.. But it's a tac-tic to get us comfortable.. I read what they are doing in New York an it sickens me.. Not to sound like a conspiracy nut but along with this I heard from some friends in the military whom don't want to be named that those who won't fulfill there contract by "defending our country foreign or DOMESTIC" are being let go. Just cause shooting our own people is hard to do.. Any way no need to reply I'm working on uncovering that one myself


    -Matt of Hillsboro OR-
    You will be persecuted here for that line of thinking.

    Keep your head on a swivel.

  15. #15
    Regular Member PFC HALE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    earth
    Posts
    492

    Assault weapon ban Thursday

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Fear-mongering BS. So she's putting forward a Bill; she is anti-gun. Thank goodness it has no chance in hell-fire of passing.
    sitting back expecting nothing will happen to our freedoms has led us to this point of our freedoms being encroached or infringed upon further and further.

    you little girl can sit back and continue to believe nothing will happen as the 1994 AWB was passed and thankfully expired. by no means am i sitting back feeling it cant happen AGAIN.

    you are a blind fool for not having the intelligence to understand and see history repeat itself, and possibly with this new AWB.

    SHAME ON YOU.
    Last edited by PFC HALE; 01-25-2013 at 03:17 AM.
    HOPE FOR THE BEST, EXPECT THE WORST, PREPARE FOR WAR

  16. #16
    Regular Member Mattimusmaximus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hillsboro
    Posts
    261

    Assault weapon ban Thursday

    Quote Originally Posted by palerider116 View Post
    You will be persecuted here for that line of thinking.

    Keep your head on a swivel.
    Don't get me wrong I love my country an it's people except those outa state drivers but it was just something on my mind nothing to be taken seriously


    -Matt of Hillsboro OR-

  17. #17
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    I have to wonder if these people ever give thought to the number of businesses that could be put out of business if something like this were to ever become law. I remember when Clinton was in office, AlGore made a really asinine statement one summer (he's made many but this is just an example of his ignorance of basic economics).

    The summer of 1993 was a particularly hot and dry one in the Washington, DC metro area. I had a boat which lived in a wet slip on the Aquia Creek, four miles in from its mouth at the Potomac. Though fresh water, my boat started getting barnacles on its hull and outdrive from salt water coming up from the Chesapeake Bay because of the lack of rain to cause river flow into the bay.

    Anyway, AlGore suggested curtailing boating in the area to cut down on pollutants. Boating. This causes almost no pollutants when compared to other sources. But boats are visible and are signs of a wealthy local economy. This idiot ignored the fact that there are many hundreds of small businesses who owe their livelihood on the boating community. Many of those would have to shut down if boating was forced to come to a halt.

    They just don't think..... or do they? Perhaps there is evil in more places than the obvious.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Mattimusmaximus View Post
    I concur I watched as they said it looks like its surly not to pass.. But it's a tac-tic to get us comfortable.. I read what they are doing in New York an it sickens me.. Not to sound like a conspiracy nut but along with this I heard from some friends in the military whom don't want to be named that those who won't fulfill there contract by "defending our country foreign or DOMESTIC" are being let go. Just cause shooting our own people is hard to do.. Any way no need to reply I'm working on uncovering that one myself


    -Matt of Hillsboro OR-
    No, you won't be "persecuted" for that kind of thinking. It will just be challenged by rational posters. People who have an irrational disdain for rational challenges might see it as persecution, but it isn't.

    Yes, everyone has "heard" this. That is the way rumors work. It has been posted in blogs tertiarily. The blogger is quoting someone who heard something from someone who got it from a source he is unwilling to name.

    Without a direct quote or proper attribution, it is impossible to even know whether the words "shoot Americans" were heard by the secondary source from the primary source.

    This sounds like something that Obama would do unilaterally (like the women in combat thing, despite any laws on the matter). However, until we have something better than "I heard from someone who heard from someone...," this story is BS.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by palerider116 View Post
    You will be persecuted here for that line of thinking.

    Keep your head on a swivel.
    I'm in the military and am yet to be asked this question. I don't know anyone who has been asked it. Him wondering about it won't geg pet him persecuted. People will ask cor cites or point out how it will be almost impossible to prove. But not persecuted. Now if he pushes it as if its proven fact and can't back it up that is a different story.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Unknown
    Posts
    581

    Assault weapon ban Thursday

    It will be nearly impossible to prove such an outrageous allegation. You cannot just ask the WH for confirmation and MSM will never touch it. A name will never be attached as the source because of the fear of some sort of reprisal. Alternative news outlets are still ranked somewhere between unicorns and leprechauns.

    I decline to call it BS. Uncorroborated intelligence from an unconfirmed source makes it a low priority. If more anecdotal evidence starts coming forth it may raise its alert priority.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Battle Creek, ,
    Posts
    559

    Exclamation

    Quote Originally Posted by Mattimusmaximus View Post
    I concur I watched as they said it looks like its surly not to pass.. But it's a tac-tic to get us comfortable.. I read what they are doing in New York an it sickens me.. Not to sound like a conspiracy nut but along with this I heard from some friends in the military whom don't want to be named that those who won't fulfill there contract by "defending our country foreign or DOMESTIC" are being let go. Just cause shooting our own people is hard to do.. Any way no need to reply I'm working on uncovering that one myself


    -Matt of Hillsboro OR-
    Part of their tactic is to ask for the stars but settle on the moon.... In short they produce some BS off the wall bill that they know they will not get consensus on, but then in committee they still produce some atrocity that they attempt to jam down our throats....


    WE MUST BE DILIGENT call, snail mail, e mail visit in person your Representative, let them know we are the constituents and not only expect but demand their support!!!

    In an unrelated story accusations by the Examiner claim one reason the general was asked to step down he is opposed use of the military against US citizens...

    Shock claim: Obama only wants military leaders who 'will fire on U.S. citizens'
    story here...http://www.examiner.com/article/shoc...n-u-s-citizens
    Last edited by Sheldon; 01-25-2013 at 01:10 PM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member The Airframer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    171

    Just wrote my reps

    "Dear Elected Officials,

    As known, Senator Feinstein has introduced a bill that would outlaw many commonly owned firearms that many of your voters depend on--not only for their next meal, but also their personal defense. I beg for your dedication to defeating such an unconstitutional bill that would criminalize many of your law-abiding citizens that put you in that seat to represent us.

    When our founding fathers wrote that We the People shall be "Well Armed" and that our Second Amendment right "Shall not be infringed", they didn't leave this up to interpretation for some left-wing extremist in CA to reinterpret and virtually disarm We the People from any reasonable defense against crime and tyranny.

    Please defend our rights as law-abiding citizens of the greatest free nation ever known or we will replace you next election with someone that will. I haven't supported and defended the Constitution of the United States of America for nearly a decade just to watch politicians dishonor and disgrace it by contorting its sacred meaning into a diminished, weakened shell of what our founding fathers intended. Thank you for your time and thank you for your auto-generated response ahead of time."

    Please feel free to reuse and edit to fit your personal bio, here's a link that will identify and address the emails to your elected officials:

    http://nraila.org/get-involved-local...your-reps.aspx
    It's better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it...

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    Assault weapon ban Thursday

    As I mentioned in another thread, referencing this one (and an earlier link to the bill), said link is less than USELESS. If anyone actually takes the time to read the bill (or even attempt to do so), they would notice that it is a series of edits to the existing code. What is useful would be the portion of the code in edited form that supports the questioned assertion in the thread.

    When someone posts such a bill as this, one that contains only edits to the code, and posts the whole blamed thing indiscriminately, as somehow supporting some contention of what the law will be when it is passed, it is clear that he has not really read it, or he'd know that he was essentially posting gibberish!

    I got into a debate some years ago with someone about what a bill said. He said, "Have you read the law? I have, and it says..." I posted back, "Yes, I have. Have you? It says nothing of the kind. It is a series of edits. Now, if you care to apply the edits to the current code, and post the edited part that says what you say it will say, we can discuss from there." No reply was forthcoming. Clearly he had not read the bill, nor had he applied a single one of the edits. I doubt he knew that the law was nothing but hundreds of pages of descriptions of edits!

    Now, if someone will apply the edits and show me where the new code will say what folks here have contended the law says, we can discuss from there.

    Any takers? Or shall we just move on and assume that these contentions were mythology passed along or, more likely, verbiage passing through headgear.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    As I mentioned in another thread, referencing this one (and an earlier link to the bill), said link is less than USELESS. If anyone actually takes the time to read the bill (or even attempt to do so), they would notice that it is a series of edits to the existing code. What is useful would be the portion of the code in edited form that supports the questioned assertion in the thread.
    I didn't realize someone posted this link in another thread. I'm usually pretty studious about checking existing threads and I couldn't find it. This thread is about the "Assault weapon ban Thursday" and this is the actual text of the legislation.

    As far as the usefulness of the link, it depends on the ability of the reader to, um... read.

    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    When someone posts such a bill as this, one that contains only edits to the code, and posts the whole blamed thing indiscriminately, as somehow supporting some contention of what the law will be when it is passed, it is clear that he has not really read it, or he'd know that he was essentially posting gibberish!
    I agree that it is "gibberish... blame that on DiFI.

    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    I got into a debate some years ago with someone about what a bill said. He said, "Have you read the law? I have, and it says..." I posted back, "Yes, I have. Have you? It says nothing of the kind. It is a series of edits. Now, if you care to apply the edits to the current code, and post the edited part that says what you say it will say, we can discuss from there." No reply was forthcoming. Clearly he had not read the bill, nor had he applied a single one of the edits. I doubt he knew that the law was nothing but hundreds of pages of descriptions of edits!
    Congrats on confirming you grasp the basics for understanding proposed and enacted legislation. Would you care to go further and sing "How a bill becomes a law" for us? You know... "I'm just a bill, sittin' on capitol hill".

    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Now, if someone will apply the edits and show me where the new code will say what folks here have contended the law says, we can discuss from there.

    SNIP
    Do your own dang homework. I've given you a useful link. You're welcome.
    Last edited by georg jetson; 01-28-2013 at 10:16 AM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •