"assault weapons ban" bill is dead. Long live Liberty

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/03/feinstein-assault-weapons-ban-gop-dead

After a meeting with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Monday, a frustrated Feinstein said she learned that the bill she sponsored — which bans 157 different models of assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines — wouldn’t be part of a Democratic gun bill to be offered on the Senate floor. Instead, it can be offered as an amendment. But its exclusion from the package makes what was already an uphill battle an almost certain defeat.

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/03/...the-assault-weapons-ban-from-senate-gun-bill/
“My understanding is it will not be [part of the base bill],” Feinstein said. “It will be separate.”

Asked if she were concerned about the decision, Feinstein paused and said, “Sure. I would like to [see the bill moved], but the leader has decided not to do it.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-senate-gun-control-bill-amid-waning-support/
The leader of the Democrat-controlled Senate on Tuesday dropped a proposed assault weapons ban from the chamber’s gun-control package – dealing a blow to supporters of the ban, though it could still come up for a vote.
The sponsor of the measure, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., revealed that Reid told her the proposed ban would not be in the initial package. Feinstein said she's "disappointed" with the decision, and is expected to nevertheless offer it as an amendment.

It's good that it's dead, but it was never intended to pass. Mind you if they had succeeded, that would have been a bonus for them; but now that they have "compromised", republicans will be expected to do so as well, and they have successfully framed the discussion such that compromise will probably involve universal background checks or other such foolishness.

Banning the production of new guns that "look scary" while exempting others that look "equally scary?" I really would be laughing at how ridiculous this is if she and all he other antis didn't take this so seriously.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

thewise1 said:

It's good that it's dead, but it was never intended to pass. Mind you if they had succeeded, that would have been a bonus for them; but now that they have "compromised", republicans will be expected to do so as well, and they have successfully framed the discussion such that compromise will probably involve universal background checks or other such foolishness.

Click to expand...

+1
Mind you, probably some of them were hoping by some miracle it would pass, but they probably weren't expecting it to.

They are just throwing everything they can at the wall and hoping that they'll get some of to stick in the name of "compromise."

Universal background checks have always been the fight we need to win (this time around).

If they succeed there, the 2nd amendment is worthless as a deterrent to tyranny. All some would-be tyrant needs to be inspired is a nice registry of all gun owners.

Make no mistake, universal background checks are a necessary prerequisite to universal registration, and are the camel's nose in the tent towards this aim.

By removing one portion of the bill to make it more palpable does not mean the threat of gun restrictions are over.

BigDave said:

By removing one portion of the bill to make it more palpable does not mean the threat of gun restrictions are over.

Click to expand...

This is Truth!! Do not sit on your laurels. Continue to call, write, email, visit, your "representatives". Tell them what YOU want.

MSG Laigaie said:

This is Truth!! Do not sit on your laurels. Continue to call, write, email, visit, your "representatives". Tell them what YOU want.

Click to expand...

That's right, it's not over. We've defeated communism once.

The monster should go hunting with Cheney ....

MSG Laigaie said:

This is Truth!! Do not sit on your laurels. Continue to call, write, email, visit, your "representatives". Tell them what YOU want.

Click to expand...

+1

How sad is it they lacked support from the people but were still pushing this.

I want no more "rule of majority", I want a constitutionally limited government that respects individual rights.......and I am fighting for that.

Considering the intentions of the authors of this bill, I think it is quite possible that this is what they intended all along. Do NOT drop your guard. While yes, an all out AWB has been effectively stopped - this time - they may try to sneak something through as an amendment.

Good news with a Caveat!!

Feinstien can still introduce her bans as an amendment to the bill as it is....
BE DILIGENT THIS IS NOT OVER YET!!!

But without these assault weapons, how are we supposed to legally hunt humans

paramedic said:

But without these assault weapons, how are we supposed to legally hunt humans

Click to expand...

I think you mean: tyrants, communists, fascists, traitors (treason), terrorists, invaders, puppets, ... the list goes on and on. I know you were being sarcastic, but I don't think you should have used the word 'humans', it's degrading to most humans to relate them to what you intended to imply

thewise1 said:

It's good that it's dead, but it was never intended to pass. Mind you if they had succeeded, that would have been a bonus for them; but now that they have "compromised", republicans will be expected to do so as well, and they have successfully framed the discussion such that compromise will probably involve universal background checks or other such foolishness.

Click to expand...

I AM 100% positive it would have passed, THE ONLY THING THAT SAVED US IS THE 2014 RE-ELECTIONS. The republican are to be held in the same regard as these progressives, they are to never be trusted. What you can be sure of is this, it is not if, it is when. If they know they can get away with anything they pass they will do it every time. Even that does not scare them anymore, they are going for broke. They receive benefits for life and a paycheck for life.

motoxmann said:

(snip)I think you mean: tyrants, communists, fascists, traitors (treason), terrorists, invaders, puppets,

Click to expand...

Couldn't we have them declared as varmints, that would eliminate the need for a hunting licensing; however, I would be willing to purchase a license.

motoxmann said:

I think you mean: tyrants, communists, fascists, traitors (treason), terrorists, invaders, puppets, ... the list goes on and on. I know you were being sarcastic, but I don't think you should have used the word 'humans', it's degrading to most humans to relate them to what you intended to imply

Click to expand...

It was in reference to a quote from Feinstein herself. She said it was "legal to hunt humans."

The bill may be "dead"...

but there is still the threat of it resurfacing as an amendment. Even if the bill is "dead", the idea is not. Quite often, bills are rushed through without thorough debate (or reading...many bills are fairly long reads) and these things can be tacked on as amendments, with very few people catching them. A ban on magazines that are over 5 rounds can easily be passed by tacking it as an amendment to a bill that would otherwise be harmless or totally unrelated to guns.

motoxmann said:

I think you mean: tyrants, communists, fascists, traitors (treason), terrorists, invaders, puppets, ... the list goes on and on. I know you were being sarcastic, but I don't think you should have used the word 'humans', it's degrading to most humans to relate them to what you intended to imply

Click to expand...

He was referring to an earlier Fienstien quote of how humans are hunted... I forget the context...