Feinstein gives 2A a quota: says that 2271 weapons is all we need

C

Courtney.cj.chen

Courtney
Love the recent debate between cruz and feinstein!!

Heres a brief clip
Cruz, Feinstein tangle over 2nd Amendment as panel approves assault-weapons ban | Fox News

cruz starts out by respectfully addressing feinstein and asks how she would feel if she went after the 1st or 4th A in the same manner as they were going after the 2A.

feinstein aggressively responds- by detailing all her experience in political office. and says, "i am not a sixth grader" and states that 2271 weapons should be enough of an variety of firearms for us.

Hmmm…. we could start substantiating certain categories/areas of the 1st and 4th Amendments- that we could limit ourselves to- that would make this a similar example to feinstein stating that: isn't 2271 weapons (that are exempt from her ban) enough for the people of the United States? This fever isn't going to stop with certain weapons- nor is it going to stop after its completely eaten up the entire 2A with over-regulated beyond recognition restrictions- it will continue to spread to the other amendments- because that is one of the ways that the law works. By breaking/changing former laws by swaying a panel or jury and then referencing those cases- to push the envelope with future cases.
 
and I have to point out- how sad is it that states especially like New York and Illinois- states that are largely made up of rural and suburban towns and cities- ignore the needs of their citizens in order to tend to the needs/desires of their denser and more profitable NYC and Chicago. Imagine living on land where your nearest neighbor is between minutes to miles away (on the minimal end)...
 
Once the guns are gone, they will direct their attention to the Bible and any other religious things that doesn't go along with Islam. Get rid of the 2nd then the others will be like taking candy from a baby.
 
Feinstien and all of her suppurating leftist ilk from the top of the government to the lowliest groveling Obama sycophant all have one agenda... one goal... to be the one's in power to rule over those lessor than their magnificent selves. And in order to return to the days of the Lord and Ladies in the castle on the hill ruling over the peasants in the mud huts below the peasants must not be allowed to have any guns with which to fight back against the guns those Lords and Ladies will need ........... to keep the peasants in the mud.
 
You left out her best quote from the video. She stated "I've seen the bullets that implode!" Yes, you read that right.
 
And she "stuck my finger in bullet holes". Seriously? Sounds like she watched too many Roadrunner cartoons where Wile E. Coyote sticks his fingers in dyke holes to stop the leaks.
 
Bikenut said:
Feinstien and all of her suppurating leftist ilk from the top of the government to the lowliest groveling Obama sycophant all have one agenda... one goal... to be the one's in power to rule over those lessor than their magnificent selves. And in order to return to the days of the Lord and Ladies in the castle on the hill ruling over the peasants in the mud huts below the peasants must not be allowed to have any guns with which to fight back against the guns those Lords and Ladies will need ........... to keep the peasants in the mud.
Click to expand...


yep... bc really... what the hell is she going to do today- without her leadership in the anti-gun movement? Without that cause- she would be a nobody right now- and definitely a lady without power. The only power she'd have is deciding whether she will be having strawberry jello or chocolate pudding on sundays. This is her ticket for an extended stay in the limelight of politics.... and when and if this is over with- hopefully its off to a retirement community she goes. (so would you blame the see-you-next-tuesday for leading and creating the bandwagon after sandy h. what a disgraceful opportunist.)
 
2271? If that's how many we can have, guess I'm about 2267 short. Think I'll go shopping. On a serious note, Diane Feinstein is a hypocrite and a liar. Not only does she have a CCW (or did in the past), but she didn't stick her fingers in any bullet holes. Yes, she was there when Harvey Milk was killed. That' about the only thing true. The gun used to kill Milk was a revolver.
 
It is important to remember that Feinstein said around the time of the original AWB that she'd have had "Mr. and Mrs. American turn them all in" if she could have gotten the votes for it. Nobody should be fooled if today THEIR weapon of choice is not on the "kill list" (pun intended). The purpose of that AWB is simply to get the populace used to the idea than some things can be banned at all. Then to expand the list again and again.
 
When Sen. Cruz was trying to "SCHOOL" her on the constitution, he should have told her there is no other interpretation to the 2dA.
The 2dA is the only ammendment which states a purpose. Furthermore, it also affirms that it IS absolute.
Pretty much all of the laws against the 2dA are un-constitutional. Just because the SCOTUS has said they are not, doesn't make it right.
The Supreme Court has made mistakes before while following political points of view.
I agree to a point that, some restrictions on the 2dA are necessary for a civilized society, but banning certain weapons just because they
look "SCARY" is just plain stupid. Will do nothing to save us from idiots that mean to do us harm.
 
Baloney. Shall not be infringed means just that. Period. My right to keep and bear arms cannot be trumped by any restrictions. Period. Regardless of who I am or what you may think about me. Period. If you don't like me because I may have done something that someone with a law degree has described as a felony, then shoot me. You can't restrict my right to keep and bear arms. Period. Shall not be infringed means you can't restrict me to being unarmed. Period. Got it?
 
UATKP said:
Baloney. Shall not be infringed means just that. Period. My right to keep and bear arms cannot be trumped by any restrictions. Period. Regardless of who I am or what you may think about me. Period. If you don't like me because I may have done something that someone with a law degree has described as a felony, then shoot me. You can't restrict my right to keep and bear arms. Period. Shall not be infringed means you can't restrict me to being unarmed. Period. Got it?
Click to expand...

Oh, I get it. So you're saying you don't obey ANY of the many gun laws in Texas?
 
I must admit, once they get the semi auto's off the street, they will then go after the bolt guns. lets face it, it is a bolt gun that has killed a person at roughly a mile and a half. No semi auto can hold that claim. What kills me is the fact she left off one important "military style weapon" off her ban list. The 1911 has been in military service for over 100 years now, granted its gone through its ups and downs for service issue. Hey guess what, it meets the mag limit they propose. To me a gun ban is not a slippery slope, its jumping off a cliff. hitting the bottom is going to hurt a lot worse than leaving well enough alone. As for the SCOTUS, those douchbags should have stated from the beginning that any law made against guns before amending the constitution is a violation. Personally I think the state legislature from both California and Illinois should be replaced due to the constant violations of the constitution. In my opinion, "shall not be infringed" should be changed to "shall not be infringed unless you have been convicted by a jury of your peers of a felony or a violent crime towards another within a period of the last 10 years" This would make the current no guns for felons laws constitutional
 
Danieljoe1 said:
I must admit, once they get the semi auto's off the street, they will then go after the bolt guns. lets face it, it is a bolt gun that has killed a person at roughly a mile and a half. No semi auto can hold that claim. What kills me is the fact she left off one important "military style weapon" off her ban list. The 1911 has been in military service for over 100 years now, granted its gone through its ups and downs for service issue. Hey guess what, it meets the mag limit they propose. To me a gun ban is not a slippery slope, its jumping off a cliff. hitting the bottom is going to hurt a lot worse than leaving well enough alone. As for the SCOTUS, those douchbags should have stated from the beginning that any law made against guns before amending the constitution is a violation. Personally I think the state legislature from both California and Illinois should be replaced due to the constant violations of the constitution. In my opinion, "shall not be infringed" should be changed to "shall not be infringed unless you have been convicted by a jury of your peers of a felony or a violent crime towards another within a period of the last 10 years" This would make the current no guns for felons laws constitutional
Click to expand...
Good stuff.... and I was with you all the way up to the part of your post I put in bold for emphasis....

The disconnect in the logic that folks use to justify banning guns from felons (or any criminal) is that it is expected the ban will prevent the felon from having a gun just because there is a law saying they aren't "allowed" to have one.

But if the criminal was the least bit concerned about what the law says he isn't "allowed" to do he wouldn't have committed the crime that made him a felon in the first place. So any and all laws that do not "allow" criminals to have guns are useless because the very definition of a criminal is someone who doesn't care what the law says he is not allowed to do.

I've said it many times... the gun isn't the problem and gun control laws are not the solution... if a convicted criminal cannot be trusted out in society with a gun then keep him locked up and out of society. Control the criminal that commits the crimes instead of trying to control the things he uses while committing those crimes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 224 (members: 0, guests: 224)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,523
Messages
610,661
Members
74,992
Latest member
RedDotArmsTraining

Share this page

Back
Top