Dianne Feinstein To Introduce Assault Weapons Ban On First Day Of Congress (Representatives, death)

[malamute]

I saw her on television this morning --- looking absolutely gleeful about the shootings, so eager to jump on this tragedy to push her own political agenda. Sometimes politicians are so absolutely pathetic -- wish we could ban them.

[FinsterRufus]

Originally Posted by Lilly1224

The normalization of violence throughout impoverished communities is especially troubling.

In truth, mothers from poor communities deserve to have the same assurances as moms from well off communities. At the end of the day, we all want to feel comfortable sending our children to school, without the threat of harm.

Absolutely and utterly could not agree with you more.

[e_coli]

I'm in favor of real and comprehensive gun regulation, yet surprisingly, I'm not really for an outright blanket ban per se. I have the feeling that what I propose would probably be rejected by people on both sides of the debate. On the one hand, I think we need real gun control reform: gun tracking, gun registration, gun licensing, and licensing renewals. We need gun taxes and gun liability insurance for each gun owned. The laws need to be federal in scope - no more states rights on this issue except to go beyond the scope of what the federal government. Bear in mind - my proposed gun laws would not apply to state-organized militia or to members of the military or guard, only to private individuals. There would be no more carrying weapons in public unless someone could justify the need to do so. CCW permits could still exist, but there would have to be a demonstrated need, such as someone who regularly makes bank deposits for a business, or someone who has been identified as being in danger, or a certified security official, etc.

Those individuals who were willing to abide by these restrictions would be allowed to own whatever guns they wish to own, though there might be different categories of weapons and the level of stringency might be different depending on the class of weapons owned. But if someone wanted to own an AK or an SKS, in theory, they could do so lawfully and I wouldn't have a problem with it. The problem with a lot of the laws we have now is that they're unsystematic and, consequently, largely ineffective. It's easy for someone to get their hands on one. If we had real gun control, though, licensing and registration would exist for any and all guns. Any gun that was not registered would be turned in to authorities or to someone else who would be interested in registering them and owning them. Anyone found in possession of an unregistered gun would be subjected to major penalties - major fines at the very least and possibly jail time. There would be a strong incentive to comply with the law, or better stated, a strong deterrent for not complying, so the whole argument that 'criminals don't respect laws' would go out the window. The effect would be on the availability of guns - there would be an immediate decrease. But, if someone were to want to possess these guns - even semiautomatic weapons - and do so lawfully, there wouldn't be a problem. Moreover, the ones who would be in possession of them would be law-abiding, responsible owners, not some deranged family member of an unregulated gun enthusiast.

That is the only way gun regulation is going to have an impact. Just passing a symbolic law called the Newton Gun Law or whatever isn't going to do diddly. And until we take bold and decisive actions beyond just bowing our heads in prayer, this kind of carnage will probably happen again. Prayer and lowering our flags to half mast, and hugging our children...that's all well and good, but none of that will solve this problem. ANd for the record, I agree that guns are not at all the only problem here. I think the main problem is that our society seems to either openly or tacitly embrace violence as a means of solving problems. Maybe it's our frontier heritage, I don't know. But what I do know is that we seem to use violence as an answer to any of our problems. 'If someone at school ticks us off, hit em.' 'If someone spills beer on us, threaten to whup their ass in the parking lot.' 'A country makes us mad, we bomb 'em.' I think the gun is actually a symbolic extension of this warped mentality. It was the way frontier Americans dealt with their problems, but America's not a frontier people anymore. Americans need to put their guns n ammo away and start learning to build meaningful communities and dialogue.

[Haakon]

Originally Posted by freightshaker

I almost find this laughable. I have heard she herself owns some of these weapons..

Just more of the usual hypocrisy from the left. They have absolute proof their plan didn't work the last time, but they can't wait to do it again. They have no original ideas that might actually address the problem.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein

[Dhult]

Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale

Congress responds to it's constituents.

Most of the rest of the country is more concerned with gun violence right now, I believe.

That is where your first miscalculation is going to meet a dead end. Unlike electoral votes for president or highly compact urban areas where you probably reside the house is representation of every area of this country.

I have no doubt people are talking about gun violence and gun control in your area of California as they are in mine. While they are talking about violence in the heart land they aren't talking about bans and control.


Only in certain demographics and elitist talking heads on television based in New York, West Coast and D.C..

Originally Posted by padcrasher

Apparently, it hasn't sunk in with you that you gun worshipers lost the last election. And you have no chance again with the changing demographics of ever holding the executive again with the current GOP brand that caters to bitter, old, white, men.

So don't be so sure an assault weapons ban won't be in your future.

You political hack jobs are getting tiring. Yawnnnnnnnn
I'm not a Republican you little prejudice hack but didn't everyone state that before the last mid terms when the republicans took back the house? The country is divided, period. And people like you thrive off it. You think Biden will get the same support? It will not happen.

As things change the more they stay the same. After every election the other side states the other party is dead.

12 years of Republicans (Reagan and Bush 1) - Democrat congress
8 Years of Democrats (Clinton) - Midterm Republican Congress
8 Years of Republicans (Bush 2) - 2 midterm Democrat congress
8 years of Democrats (Obama) - Midterm house becomes Republican yet again.

Nothing changes.

Originally Posted by padcrasher

I hope when and if minorities obtain majority status they are as mean and cruel as those white good ole boys were to them.

Quit being such a little bigot. You little race baiting troll. There are plenty of angry Americans to go around. Plenty good ole boy systems in the cities and they aren't all White...

[roysoldboy]

Originally Posted by FinsterRufus

Good. That's one detriment, make them too expensive for your average mass murderer.

Did Friday's average mass murder buy his rifles? Somehow I thought he took them from his mother's house. I guess not, in the eyes of a prog.

[hammertime33]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

And? You're missing the point, these people set out to kill a lot of people and that's exactly what they did.

I'm not missing any point. I'm simply responded to a post that claimed the ONLY means the 911 hijackers needed were boxcutters and airfare. Those weren't the only mean necessary - which was all my post was addressing.

[SHABAZZ310]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Common sense is guns are not the only weapons available. As I pointed out in another thread 19 men armed with nothing more than box cutters killed almost 3,000 people which was a remarkably low number considering the circumstances.

If you want a to kill a lot of people you only need one thing, the will to do it.

Let me get this straight. You're saying box cutters are more deadly then guns? Like I said perviously banning guns will not stop violence! What banning guns will do is limit the death toll when violence occurs.

[Haakon]

Originally Posted by padcrasher

Good riddance.

Then whites that aren't paranoid of brown people can work together to make things better for the middle class.

I hope when and if minorities obtain majority status they are as mean and cruel as those white good ole boys were to them.

LOL, yeah those brown people have been doing a great job in Detroit and Flint and New Orleans and Baltimore where they have had majority status for years. They're just beacons of peace, harmony and prosperity. I can hardly wait for them to make the entire country like Detroit.

[malamute]

Originally Posted by roysoldboy

Did Friday's average mass murder buy his rifles? Somehow I thought he took them from his mother's house. I guess not, in the eyes of a prog.

Yes -- that's the whole problem. Connecticut actually has gun laws --- contrary to what's being said on these forums. In fact they have tougher restrictions than most states.

This killer simply stole the weapons. He didn't obey the laws -- period.