• 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.

Fienstien exempts herself

papa bear

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
2,222
Location
mayberry, nc
[h=3]Feinstein's Gun Ban Exempts... Her[/h]By Bobby Eberle January 28, 2013 12:41 pm
Text Size: A A A

The Democrats are clamoring for a gun ban. It doesn't matter that the federal government has no business tracking us or telling us what firearm we can or can't own, but now liberals like Dianne Feinstein are throwing in a hefty dose of hypocrisy. It turns out that Feinstein's bill would exempt her from the restrictions placed on everyone else.
As reported in the Washington Times, "the measure is by far the most ambitious of the number of gun-control bills introduced in the wake of the school shootings in Newtown, Conn., last month."
Her bill seeks to reinstate and expand the ban on assault weapons that was first enacted in 1994, but which lapsed in 2004.
It would prohibit semiautomatic pistols that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one military feature, such as a pistol grip or telescoping. Purchasing the AR-15 Bushmaster rifle, which was used by the shooter in Newtown, would be illegal under the ban.
Mrs. Feinstein's measure would exempt more than 2,200 types of hunting and sporting rifles; guns manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action; and weapons used by government officials, law enforcement and retired law enforcement personnel.
It would also ban ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.
The Weekly Standard confirms other reports by stating, "if the proposed legislation becomes law, government officials and others will be exempt."
So what is going on here? People in houses... facing intruders... will be restricted on what they can use to defend themselves, but Feinstein and others won't?
This entire debate is just a ploy by the government to gain more control... and firearms are the vehicle. If Feinstein can defend herself with whatever means she deems appropriate, shouldn't you be able to do the same?


 

zack991

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
1,535
Location
Ohio, USA
Now the Constitution says they are not allowed to make any law the exempts them while putting restrictions on the public. I am surprised no one has taken them to court over that violation of the Constitution, it would really clean house of a lot of these type of laws.
 
Last edited:

zack991

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
1,535
Location
Ohio, USA
This again?

Can someone please cite the portion of the bill that exempts members of the legislature?


“Mrs. Feinstein’s measure would exempt more than 2,200 types of hunting and sporting rifles; guns manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action; and weapons used by government officials, law enforcement and retired law enforcement personnel,” the Washington Times reports.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...rolls-out-proposal-ban-assault-weapons/print/

You can press Control F to do a search of her bill to get the exact spot in her bill from her site. She is consider to be a government official and she has a CCW permit while many in her state are denied one. So its not hard for me to think she made herself exempt. I cant do it from my phone.
 
Last edited:

ADobbs1989

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
465
Location
Alabama
When it says "weapons used by government officials" wouldn't that mean that the government official would actually have to have an "official" reason for using the weapon? I don't think it would pertain to recreational use of a weapon.
 

zack991

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
1,535
Location
Ohio, USA
When it says "weapons used by government officials" wouldn't that mean that the government official would actually have to have an "official" reason for using the weapon? I don't think it would pertain to recreational use of a weapon.

So many of their bills progressives are pushing are so vague in their wording that it is meant to make it hard on us to fight them in court as well to protect them being exempt from the law in every possible way.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
“Mrs. Feinstein’s measure would exempt more than 2,200 types of hunting and sporting rifles; guns manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action; and weapons used by government officials, law enforcement and retired law enforcement personnel,” the Washington Times reports.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...rolls-out-proposal-ban-assault-weapons/print/

You can press Control F to do a search of her bill to get the exact spot in her bill from her site. She is consider to be a government official and she has a CCW permit while many in her state are denied one. So its not hard for me to think she made herself exempt. I cant do it from my phone.

The person who makes a contention should support it, not assign homework to someone who asks for a cite.

Have you read the bill? It is a HUGE list of edits to the code. If someone is going to contend that the bill says something, they should support that contention by applying the appropriate edit to the appropriate paragraph of the current code, and show that it exempts legislators. No one who has made this contention has yet to bother to back the claim up. A few have lazily just linked the bill and assigned homework.

That is intellectually dishonest, lazy, or both.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
When it says "weapons used by government officials" wouldn't that mean that the government official would actually have to have an "official" reason for using the weapon? I don't think it would pertain to recreational use of a weapon.

That is what I suspect the claimants are mistakenly referring to. That is why I have asked for a cite about a dozen times in about a half-a-dozen different threads with this same unsupported contention. No one has yet to find the actual language that supports the contention. I suspect that they can't and are simply regurgitating the mythology that they are predisposed to believe.

On edit: OCDO used to be better than this.
 
Last edited:

zack991

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
1,535
Location
Ohio, USA
The person who makes a contention should support it, not assign homework to someone who asks for a cite.

Have you read the bill? It is a HUGE list of edits to the code. If someone is going to contend that the bill says something, they should support that contention by applying the appropriate edit to the appropriate paragraph of the current code, and show that it exempts legislators. No one who has made this contention has yet to bother to back the claim up. A few have lazily just linked the bill and assigned homework.

That is intellectually dishonest, lazy, or both.

Again I was not the one who started the thread and was just providing the link as best I could from my phone. I am digging through it now and found a few things will post them when I get done. Page 15-18 lists some officials who are exempt I have found so far.



15
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(A) the importation for, manufacture for, sale
2 to, transfer to, or possession by the United States
3 or a department or agency of the United States or
4 a State or a department, agency, or political subdivi
5 sion of a State, or a sale or transfer to or possession
6 by a qualified law enforcement officer employed by
7 the United States or a department or agency of the
8 United States or a State or a department, agency,
9 or political subdivision of a State, for purposes of
10 law enforcement (whether on or off duty), or a sale
11 or transfer to or possession by a campus law en
12 forcement officer for purposes of law enforcement
13 (whether on or off duty);
14 ‘‘(B) the importation for, or sale or transfer to
15 a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of
16 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining
17 an on-site physical protection system and security
18 organization required by Federal law, or possession
19 by an employee or contractor of such licensee on-site
20 for such purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee
21authorized training or transportation of nuclear ma
22 terials;
23 ‘‘(C) the possession, by an individual who is retired in good standing from service with a law en
25 forcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited


16
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 from receiving a firearm, of a semiautomatic assault
2 weapon—
3 ‘‘(i) sold or transferred to the individual by
4 the agency upon such retirement; or
5 ‘‘(ii) that the individual purchased, or oth
6erwise obtained, for official use before such re
7 tirement;
8 ‘‘(D) the importation, sale, manufacture, trans
9 fer, or possession of a semiautomatic assault weapon
10 by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for
11 the purposes of testing or experimentation author
12 ized by the Attorney General; or
13 ‘‘(E) the importation, sale, manufacture, trans
14 fer, or possession of a firearm specified in Appendix
15 A to this section, as such firearm was manufactured
16 on the date of introduction of the Assault Weapons
17 Ban of 2013.
18 ‘‘(5) For purposes of paragraph (4)(A), the term
19 ‘campus law enforcement officer’ means an individual who
20 is—
21 ‘‘(A) employed by a private institution of higher
22 education that is eligible for funding under title IV
23 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.'
24 1070 et seq.);

17
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(B) responsible for the prevention or investiga
2 tion of crime involving injury to persons or property,
3 including apprehension or detention of persons for
4 such crimes;
5 ‘‘(C) authorized by Federal, State, or local law
6 to carry a firearm, execute search warrants, and
7 make arrests; and
8 ‘‘(D) recognized, commissioned, or certified by
9 a government entity as a law enforcement officer.
10 ‘‘(6) The Attorney General shall establish and main
11 tain, in a timely manner, a record of the make, model,
12 and, if available, date of manufacture of any semiauto
13 matic assault weapon which the Attorney General is made
14 aware has been used in relation to a crime under Federal
15 or State law, and the nature and circumstances of the
16 crime involved, including the outcome of relevant criminal
17 investigations and proceedings. The Attorney General
18 shall annually submit a copy of the record established
19 under this paragraph to the Congress and make the record
20 available to the general public.
21 ‘‘(w)(1) It shall be unlawful for a person to import,
22 sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting
23 interstate or foreign commerce, a large capacity ammunition feeding device.


18
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession
2 of any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise
3 lawfully possessed on or before the date of enactment of
4 the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013.
5 ‘‘(3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to—
6 ‘‘(A) the importation for, manufacture for, sale
7 to, transfer to, or possession by the United States
8 or a department or agency of the United States or
9 a State or a department, agency, or political subdivi
10 sion of a State, or a sale or transfer to or possession
11 by a qualified law enforcement officer employed by
12 the United States or a department or agency of the
13 United States or a State or a department, agency,
14 or political subdivision of a State for purposes of law
15 enforcement (whether on or off duty), or a sale or
16 transfer to or possession by a campus law enforce
17 ment officer for purposes of law enforcement (wheth
18 er on or off duty);


19
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 authorized training or transportation of nuclear ma
2 terials;
3 ‘‘(C) the possession, by an individual who is re
4 tired in good standing from service with a law en
5 forcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited
6 from receiving ammunition, of a large capacity am
7 munition feeding device—
8 ‘‘(i) sold or transferred to the individual by
9 the agency upon such retirement; or
10 ‘‘(ii) that the individual purchased, or oth'
11 erwise obtained, for official use before such re
12 tirement; or
13 ‘‘(D) the importation, sale, manufacture, trans
14 fer, or possession of any large capacity ammunition
15 feeding device by a licensed manufacturer or licensed
16 importer for the purposes of testing or experimen17
tation authorized by the Attorney General.
18 ‘‘(4) For purposes of paragraph (3)(A), the term
19 ‘campus law enforcement officer’ means an individual who
20 is—
21 ‘‘(A) employed by a private institution of higher
22 education that is eligible for funding under title IV
23 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
24 1070 et seq.);
 
Last edited:

zack991

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
1,535
Location
Ohio, USA
I posted what I found so far, I am heading to bed I have to be up to work in 4 hours, feel free to dig through it.
 

adam3176

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
81
Location
washington
[h=3]Feinstein's Gun Ban Exempts... Her[/h]By Bobby Eberle January 28, 2013 12:41 pm
Text Size: A A A

The Democrats are clamoring for a gun ban. It doesn't matter that the federal government has no business tracking us or telling us what firearm we can or can't own, but now liberals like Dianne Feinstein are throwing in a hefty dose of hypocrisy. It turns out that Feinstein's bill would exempt her from the restrictions placed on everyone else.
As reported in the Washington Times, "the measure is by far the most ambitious of the number of gun-control bills introduced in the wake of the school shootings in Newtown, Conn., last month."
Her bill seeks to reinstate and expand the ban on assault weapons that was first enacted in 1994, but which lapsed in 2004.
It would prohibit semiautomatic pistols that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one military feature, such as a pistol grip or telescoping. Purchasing the AR-15 Bushmaster rifle, which was used by the shooter in Newtown, would be illegal under the ban.
Mrs. Feinstein's measure would exempt more than 2,200 types of hunting and sporting rifles; guns manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action; and weapons used by government officials, law enforcement and retired law enforcement personnel.
It would also ban ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.
The Weekly Standard confirms other reports by stating, "if the proposed legislation becomes law, government officials and others will be exempt."
So what is going on here? People in houses... facing intruders... will be restricted on what they can use to defend themselves, but Feinstein and others won't?
This entire debate is just a ploy by the government to gain more control... and firearms are the vehicle. If Feinstein can defend herself with whatever means she deems appropriate, shouldn't you be able to do the same?




I said it once. And ill say it agian. You all May not understand what is happening. They want you to watch the circus show untill they piss the people off enough and then stage a civil war. You will be angry at the Puppet leaders you see on tv. Its a Stage show. No one on tv has real power. They are agents. If you dont take a closer look at the hidden power then you will all miss the point of what is happening. And the Hidden power will stay in power because everyone will attack the puppet leaders and never see behind the curtian
 

zack991

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
1,535
Location
Ohio, USA
IN HER OWN WORDS: See video from 20:50 - 20:58
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJUfrXO__Q0&feature=player_embedded#!

Here is from the 20:30 second mark and on to get her whole sentence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJUfrXO__Q0&feature=player_detailpage#t=1229s

As for the spot in her bill I emailed the editor from the weekly standard he cited the same pages as I have and he also had stated that on her own website it listed government officials as exempt and since the news coverage of this, he said it has since been removed from her summery. He said it was quite odd she has now edited it from her summery but the bill that she has posted on her site still has not been changed or noting any changes to her bill.

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons-ban-summary

This is the now edited text according to the editor who has said the Government officials was removed after the news media posted the articles about government officials being exempt.

The legislation excludes the following weapons from the bill:

Any weapon that is lawfully possessed at the date of the bill’s enactment;
Any firearm manually operated by a bolt, pump, lever or slide action;
Assault weapons used by military, law enforcement, and retired law enforcement; and
Antique weapons.
 
Last edited:

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
You can press Control F to do a search of her bill to get the exact spot in her bill from her site. She is consider to be a government official and she has a CCW permit while many in her state are denied one. So its not hard for me to think she made herself exempt. I cant do it from my phone.

No, you can do it before you post crap. Too bad the Washington Times doesn't have Rule #5:

CITE TO AUTHORITY: If you state a rule of law, it is incumbent upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when available,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.

The legislation excludes the following weapons from the bill:

Any weapon that is lawfully possessed at the date of the bill’s enactment;
Any firearm manually operated by a bolt, pump, lever or slide action;
Assault weapons used by military, law enforcement, and retired law enforcement; and
Antique weapons.

Well duh. What gun control bill hasn't? Is Feinstein an LEO? Retired LEO, even?

Frankly, if you can't even find where the bill creates such an exemption, why are you railing against it? There's plenty wrong with the bill in principle you could spend your time arguing against. Feinstein could be a saint with the best intentions in the world, and her bill is still a bad one.
 
Last edited:

zack991

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
1,535
Location
Ohio, USA
No, you can do it before you post crap. Too bad the Washington Times doesn't have Rule #5:

Again I was not the orginal poster of this thread and If you look a few post above I have cited where it points out government employees are exempt, also she say it on video in her own words that Senator graham is exempt from the law. As well as the editor noted he got his statement about "Government Officials: being exempt from her very own summery on HER site and since this has come out in the media she has since edit it from her summery. So dont snap at me period, I was just replying to the same thread as everyone else has and Eye95 asked me to find it, even though this has been covered on countless articles as being fact. I was unable to do it earlier because I could not use my I phone at work to dig into her bill. The Weekly standard, Huffington Post, Washington Times all linking her summery stating ""Government Officials" that has now since been edited from her page. If I could post a screen shot of her page prior to the edit I would.
 
Last edited:
Top