Senator Frankenstein, you act like a child, so we treat you accordingly. We know you're senile, and your hissy fit is based on your need for control. The Second Amendment does not include bazookas, and no one is talking about those other than your side. You say that you respect our views? How can we respect your yearning to infringe on our rights? And here come your fellow control freaks to sneer at rights, but you did admit to the one important fact here. Your bill won't even pass the Senate. It certainly wouldn't pass the House.
Chew on that while you clutch your pearls and gnaw the withered bones that your life has become.
The question remains, why shouldn't a law-biding citizen be able to purchase any weapon he or she chooses? There simply is no place in the Constitution that gives the Congress the authority to prohibit weapons from the citizens.
I thought Cruz embarrassed himself talking to Feinstein like she was ignorant of the issue. He's an arrogant and disrespectful man. Her response was good.
He didn't embarrass himself at all. There is a logical link in his argument, he just didn't express it as well as he could have.
Feinstein's Bill names various guns that are and aren't allowed. In the most egregious incidence, it specifically lists the tactical version of the Mini-14 as disallowed, and specifically lists the other versions of the Mini-14 in the exemptions list.
It's the same fucking gun--one just has a plastic adjustable stock on it. The other has a wooden stock that can be sawed off to make it just as "concealable" if not more so (the supposed reason for outlawing such stocks). Nothing in the law (existing law or Feinstein's bill) would prevent cutting off the wood stock.
When you get down to listing specific models of guns that are allowed or disallowed, and even get to the point that you name different stocked models of the SAME gun as being on either side, it becomes plausible to draw an analogy to laws singling out specific books, or even specific publishing runs of the. E.g. perhaps we'll ban all non-bowlderized versions of Huck Finn. You can still read Huck Finn or other books, so why would you need to perpetuate copies that used the word nigger in them?
Are you comfortable with such a situation? Maybe you are, and I'm just being a First Amendment extremist too.
Maybe you're too biased and dishonest to admit it, but I find it very embarrassing to be called out for claiming all the rights are unlimited. I also thought he embarrassed himself by talking to Feinstein as if she were younger and more inexperienced in these matters than he is.
Biased and dishonest huh. I'll admit to the biased part, but for the full charge you need to look in the mirror. As for your two points:
Deal with what I said above--he wasn't saying that there are no limits to rights; he said that you can't go around naming guns that are ok and guns that aren't just like you can't name books that are ok and books that aren't without some standard that can pass strict scrutiny. I'd love for you to explain why we should ban one model of Mini-14 and not all the others--by what standard--and don't just parrot some kind of bullshit from a gun control group. Look at the differences in the models--you can find them on Ruger's website, and draw upon your claimed knowledge of guns and the education you've received from us.
As for your second point--Feinstein may have years on him, but she can't make a halfway convincing argument for her law. Hell, while it was being drafted, her office told me that ALL models of Mini-14 would be banned, as would all models of the M-1 Carbine. Yet, after the consultation they told me they were going to have the following week with the ATF, they changed their tune and suddenly there were good models and bad ones. The woman and her staff have no idea what they're doing when it comes to drafting firearms legislation and deserve to be talked down to for coming up with such a shitty product. This bill is a steaming pile of crap on many levels.
She's entering her second childhood, perhaps. At the very least, she's a whining elitist, clutching her pearls and threatening to faint a tthe dinner table because someone said something she didn't like. I was raised in the South, but I've learned the lesson of equality--you want to play in the big game, you take the same lumps everyone else gets. She should be sent back to that minor league town she was once mayor of.
Of course, given her connections, she could still get a carry license.
Senator Frankenstein, you act like a child, so we treat you accordingly. We know you're senile, and your hissy fit is based on your need for control. The Second Amendment does not include bazookas, and no one is talking about those other than your side. You say that you respect our views? How can we respect your yearning to infringe on our rights? And here come your fellow control freaks to sneer at rights, but you did admit to the one important fact here. Your bill won't even pass the Senate. It certainly wouldn't pass the House.
ReplyDeleteChew on that while you clutch your pearls and gnaw the withered bones that your life has become.
The question remains, why shouldn't a law-biding citizen be able to purchase any weapon he or she chooses?
ReplyDeleteThere simply is no place in the Constitution that gives the Congress the authority to prohibit weapons from the citizens.
orlin sellers
I thought Cruz embarrassed himself talking to Feinstein like she was ignorant of the issue. He's an arrogant and disrespectful man. Her response was good.
DeleteHe didn't embarrass himself at all. There is a logical link in his argument, he just didn't express it as well as he could have.
DeleteFeinstein's Bill names various guns that are and aren't allowed. In the most egregious incidence, it specifically lists the tactical version of the Mini-14 as disallowed, and specifically lists the other versions of the Mini-14 in the exemptions list.
It's the same fucking gun--one just has a plastic adjustable stock on it. The other has a wooden stock that can be sawed off to make it just as "concealable" if not more so (the supposed reason for outlawing such stocks). Nothing in the law (existing law or Feinstein's bill) would prevent cutting off the wood stock.
When you get down to listing specific models of guns that are allowed or disallowed, and even get to the point that you name different stocked models of the SAME gun as being on either side, it becomes plausible to draw an analogy to laws singling out specific books, or even specific publishing runs of the. E.g. perhaps we'll ban all non-bowlderized versions of Huck Finn. You can still read Huck Finn or other books, so why would you need to perpetuate copies that used the word nigger in them?
Are you comfortable with such a situation? Maybe you are, and I'm just being a First Amendment extremist too.
Maybe you're too biased and dishonest to admit it, but I find it very embarrassing to be called out for claiming all the rights are unlimited. I also thought he embarrassed himself by talking to Feinstein as if she were younger and more inexperienced in these matters than he is.
DeleteBiased and dishonest huh. I'll admit to the biased part, but for the full charge you need to look in the mirror. As for your two points:
DeleteDeal with what I said above--he wasn't saying that there are no limits to rights; he said that you can't go around naming guns that are ok and guns that aren't just like you can't name books that are ok and books that aren't without some standard that can pass strict scrutiny. I'd love for you to explain why we should ban one model of Mini-14 and not all the others--by what standard--and don't just parrot some kind of bullshit from a gun control group. Look at the differences in the models--you can find them on Ruger's website, and draw upon your claimed knowledge of guns and the education you've received from us.
As for your second point--Feinstein may have years on him, but she can't make a halfway convincing argument for her law. Hell, while it was being drafted, her office told me that ALL models of Mini-14 would be banned, as would all models of the M-1 Carbine. Yet, after the consultation they told me they were going to have the following week with the ATF, they changed their tune and suddenly there were good models and bad ones. The woman and her staff have no idea what they're doing when it comes to drafting firearms legislation and deserve to be talked down to for coming up with such a shitty product. This bill is a steaming pile of crap on many levels.
She's entering her second childhood, perhaps. At the very least, she's a whining elitist, clutching her pearls and threatening to faint a tthe dinner table because someone said something she didn't like. I was raised in the South, but I've learned the lesson of equality--you want to play in the big game, you take the same lumps everyone else gets. She should be sent back to that minor league town she was once mayor of.
DeleteOf course, given her connections, she could still get a carry license.
He called her out for being nothing more than a gussied up zoning board ninny...
ReplyDelete