Feinstein: NRA intimidation weakens weapons reform

What the hell is she talking about??
The NRA ain't intimidating anybody in New York or Connecticut!!
 
Allow me to paraphrase you DiDi...
We're losing the gun control battle because our solution doesn't make any sense. I blame the NRA because they are the largest group out there. Wah wah wah..."
 
"A fear has set in that if they vote for the bill they won't be re-elected. It's that plain, it's that simple," Feinstein said during an appearance before the Commonwealth Club. "My view is they shouldn't go up to the Senate if they are unwilling to stand up and vote."

They should be voting for what "we the people" want, not what she wants. And yeah, they should be in fear of losing their seats, if they don't vote the way their constituents want them to.
Heck fire boys! Seems purdy simple to me. We're your boss, vote our way or hit the highway! I'll betcha the next un' will.
 
Why would they have anything to fear if they where legislating with the will of the people. Oh, that's right they are trying to legislate AGAINST the will of the people.
 
2Awarrior said:
What the hell is she talking about??
The NRA ain't intimidating anybody in New York or Connecticut!!
Click to expand...

Nor do they intimidate Feinstein or anyone else. They are the false bogeyman that politicians hold up in just as phony a way as saying they're imposing gun control "for the children." There's a symbiotic relationship between the N R A and (especially) the DC politicians. Both play their respective roles brilliantly, but the fact is, it's a Kabuki dance that they all win something from engaging in.

Actually, I feel sorry for the N R A in this instance. They say "UBC won't work without registration." It's the truth, but the truth only earns more phony accusations of them being "radical" or "intimidating" when they are neither. They say "A 10 or 7-round magazine capacity restriction would not have stopped Sandy Hook from happening." It's the truth. But the truth only earns them more accusations of being cold-hearted towards dead kids, and they are not anything close to that either. I relate exactly to this pattern. I experience it nearly any time I try to expose a truth that most people don't want to hear and/or accept. Sometimes it's about the N R A, sometimes about the economy, and sometimes about the Truth of Christ and the Bible, but I honestly do feel the N R A's pain in this regard, being labeled in a negative light for doing nothing more than telling the truth.

I believe that there's only one entity that has the potential to intimidate DC politicians, and that is The People. The politicians and most members say that the N R A is the "biggest" gun rights organization, but that's not true by a long-shot. The biggest one are the ~85 million gun-owners who could literally bring local, and possibly even state and national economies to their knees if their true power were tapped. 4 or 5 million folks can certainly make some noise, no argument here, but they are not nearly as powerful as the N R A, its membership, or the politicians would have us believe. Diane Feinstein simply losing (for the time being) and then blaming the N R A when they did nothing but talk and generate emails, letters, phone calls and highlight already-existent public opinion from just a small percentage of gun owners, just like GOA, JPFO, SAF, and the literally hundreds, if not thousands, of gun and 2A-oriented websites like this one have been doing, pretty much proves she's just looking for a scapegoat. That's the N R A's role. That's Feinstein's role. They both play it well.

Blues
 
BluesStringer said:
Nor do they intimidate Feinstein or anyone else. They are the false bogeyman that politicians hold up in just as phony a way as saying they're imposing gun control "for the children." There's a symbiotic relationship between the N R A and (especially) the DC politicians. Both play their respective roles brilliantly, but the fact is, it's a Kabuki dance that they all win something from engaging in.

Actually, I feel sorry for the N R A in this instance. They say "UBC won't work without registration." It's the truth, but the truth only earns more phony accusations of them being "radical" or "intimidating" when they are neither. They say "A 10 or 7-round magazine capacity restriction would not have stopped Sandy Hook from happening." It's the truth. But the truth only earns them more accusations of being cold-hearted towards dead kids, and they are not anything close to that either. I relate exactly to this pattern. I experience it nearly any time I try to expose a truth that most people don't want to hear and/or accept. Sometimes it's about the N R A, sometimes about the economy, and sometimes about the Truth of Christ and the Bible, but I honestly do feel the N R A's pain in this regard, being labeled in a negative light for doing nothing more than telling the truth.

I believe that there's only one entity that has the potential to intimidate DC politicians, and that is The People. The politicians and most members say that the N R A is the "biggest" gun rights organization, but that's not true by a long-shot. The biggest one are the ~85 million gun-owners who could literally bring local, and possibly even state and national economies to their knees if their true power were tapped. 4 or 5 million folks can certainly make some noise, no argument here, but they are not nearly as powerful as the N R A, its membership, or the politicians would have us believe. Diane Feinstein simply losing (for the time being) and then blaming the N R A when they did nothing but talk and generate emails, letters, phone calls and highlight already-existent public opinion from just a small percentage of gun owners, just like GOA, JPFO, SAF, and the literally hundreds, if not thousands, of gun and 2A-oriented websites like this one have been doing, pretty much proves she's just looking for a scapegoat. That's the N R A's role. That's Feinstein's role. They both play it well.

Blues
Click to expand...

And what do you do again?
 
If my beloved NRA were to pull a miracle in NY and/or CT, nobody's gonna be more pleased than me; but as far as I can tell, the legislators in both states never heard of the NRA. They just forged ahead and did what they wanted. We're out of miracles. With all the dishonesty and ignorance in the media, we won't know if the politicians really did what the people wanted until the next election cycle.

And if they win anyway? All of us here are going to have some tough questions to ask ourselves. Like "where do we move now?"
 
Rabbitcreekok said:
I think that is the idea, to intimidate in order to weaken weapons reform.
Click to expand...

Feinstein saying that politicians are intimidated by the N R A is really intended to intimidate the already-intimidated same politicians out of "weapons reform?" Is that spin, or counter-spin? Hard to tell.

And what is "weapons reform" and who supports it and who opposes it? I've never heard it put that way, so I'm really curious what it is.
 
Half eaten pop-tarts and the state of Idaho, turned on its side scare Feinstein, and plenty of other insane individuals.

My God, I wonder what my lace-up combat boots would do to them? Heart attack?

After all, weapons of war should not be on our city streets...idiots.
 
Representing & defending the views of a million+ gunowners is not intimidation.

The concept that if a congress person votes for an unpopular piece of legislation (AR / magazine restriction) and subsequently voters express their dissatisfaction at the next election, is not intimidation; it's reality and it happened in 94.
 
I'm sure that the Ku Klu Klan feels the same way about the NAACP and its opposition to their "common sense" plans for repeal of the 13th Amendment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 128 (members: 0, guests: 128)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

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

Share this page

Back
Top