and then you jump right in and contradict him. Nice job.

Some people do want to take all firearms.

Do you read for context or just follow me around?

And I seem to be reminded of someone who used to post here...

You didn't read and you are following me...

to confiscate all firearms? Or would you have someone else do what you wouldn't be willing to do?

how many of those cheering the lunatic have good reason to suspect they wouldn't pass a simple background check?

of taxing ammo and requiring liability insurance on guns.

Make it cheap to own non auto long guns and prohibitively expensive to own the ones used in mass slaughter of human beings by angry young men.

Gun nuts like La Pierre who fancy themselves defenders of freedom against an overreaching government haven't exactly thought standing up to tanks and bombers with their little popguns through. This isn't a patriotic stand for freedom, it's a two year old screaming because Mama decided his blankie needed to be washed and tried to take it away from him.

You can't fight the military with popguns. You have to convince them they're on the wrong side. You also can't mount a program of gun confiscation without turning into a police state, at least temporarily. You have to convince these guys through their wallets that some guns are liabilities to own.

I don't like ole Wayne and wish the NRA would get rid of him and that ass hat Teddy because they do no good for gun owners.

No one wants to take away guns, if you say so.


"If I could have banned them all - 'Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns' - I would have!"
- Diane Feinstein


[link:

If they had both houses the bill would have been an out right ban.

Feinstein and others have said that is what they want. An out right ban on all guns.

ms feinstein's legislation was about assault weapons....which sure as shit should be banned.

but it was VOTED DOWN by the democratic senate.....

Why should the Democrats in red states put there heads on the block when the bill would not have passed the house in the first place.



Edit to add,

You call it paranoia when she is right there saying it. How is that paranoia? She makes a direct statement saying she would have banned them all and it is paranoia to worry about that, I don't get it.

it was 20 votes shy of passing, it needed 60 to get past the filibuster.

I thought you were talking about the recent legislation.

At Sat May 4, 2013, 10:14 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Voted down because it would not have passed the house.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2799425

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

RW gun troll lying about Democratic legislation.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat May 4, 2013, 10:23 PM, and the Jury voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Get a grip!
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

When there is another psycho that goes into a public place and opens fire. What then? Do we pass another law?

I agree that doing nothing is not a good solution. However I think it needs to be made absolutely clear that without question the goal is not to ban firearms or confiscate them. Democrats have done a really, really bad job of communicating this. You got a lot of people who are out there claiming that the 2nd amendment is meaningless. And that the government be able to ban all guns. Those are the people who are provoking this battle. They are the ones that fuel the NRA. They are the ones that provoke the "preppers" to go out and stockpile on ammo and assault rifles.

If the Democrats would come out as a party and say they support the 2nd amendment as a right for the people to keep and bear arms. I think you would have a lot more cooperation to pass sensible gun control.

Obama has said many times he supports the 2nd amendment...as have most democrats

The ones who make bombastic quotes like the ones list above will be the ones who get airplay, as is their intention.

Sen. Feinstein's AWB was part of that legislation, but it went down in spectacular defeat, 40 yeas, 60 nays.

I do wish that the UBC would've passed, and there is a good chance that the next time Sen. Reid brings it up for a vote, it will pass.

And I think I read somewhere where she has a license to carry. Its about background checks and reasonable and sensible weapons. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!!!

She wants all guns except hers and anyone else the people in power think should have one. The rest of us, no gun for you.

But your argument should be believable. Unless you are a criminal, terrorist or mentally capable of possessing a weapon they be purchased. When those with access to high capacity weapons goes out in public places and starts firing the weapon and causes mass deaths then some of the results are going to change what is available. Instead of jumping on Diane Feinstein go and jump on the unreasonable and insensible gun owners to get it together so the rest will be looking for constraints. It was not Diane Feinstein going out and committing these crimes, get on the ones who does.

How do I or any one else know when some asshole is going to go off? I wish I knew the answer to that question.

Why should I have my guns taken away because some nut goes off and kills people. How is that fair to any one? I have owned guns for 40 years and have never even pointed one at another human. But to some here and other places I am a nut job or a gun nut. My rifles are for long range target shooting. And yes two of those rifles are AR-15's. I should lose my guns because of some loony?


Fucking hand guns are the killing machines in this country, not rifles. Why no call to ban them? That asshole at VT used hand guns. That asshole in AZ used a fucking hand gun. I don't even own a fucking hand gun and could care less if they all went away. But leave my rifles alone. I use them for competition. I enjoy that. Why should I lose them because of some asshole?

...many more people are killed with handguns than any type of rifle in this country.

We have all kinds of laws or "bans" that do not stop crime now. People who are going to brake the law are not going to follow laws or bans.

We have "banned" drunk driving and yet some asshole will drive drunk tonight and kill some one.

We have "banned" murder and some asshole will murder some one tonight. Be it with a gun, knife, fist or what ever.

Taking my rifles will not stop bad people from doing bad things. It really is that simple. Assholes are going to brake laws no matter what laws are in place.

I just don't think it is fair that I lose something because of the actions of some one else. It is just not right. Should you lose your car because some asshole will drive drunk? Would that be fair to you?

Your status should change, you becoming a terrorist, domestic violence or mentally incapable of having guns in your possession. This is where so many are running off the tracks. Just because the NRA has convinced you "they gonna take away your guns", this has not been proposed. Turn your anger where it should be, start demanding gun owners become responsible, store their weapons so those who should not be having them does not get access. Place efforts on those who needs attention. Call your Congressional members and tell them to halt the sell of weapons to criminals, terrorist and mentally incapable. This is not hard, then tell other gun owners it is not true "they gonna take your guns", it is made up to scare all they can, it is not true.

when she said that, she was talking about semi auto rifles, not traditional hunting rifles or handguns.

He's a huckster, a con artist for the GSL...I mean NRA.

It is no longer the National Rifle Association.
It is the Gun Sales Lobby.

All he does is feed the BS stereotype that that all gun owners are nut jobs. Fucking Teddy needs to go also.

He makes lots of money, the gun makers make lots of money.

"Mission Accomplished"

I see this garbage posted repeatedly, usually bracketed by posts and entire threads demanding just that. It might be useful to your cause if the anti-gun advocates would stop pretending everyone else was a complete imbecile. I don't particularly care about gun control in any case -- I don't waste time on irrelevant fantasy -- but at least get your talking points straight.

Better yet, take it to the gun forums.