BREAKING: Feinstein to Intro Gun Ban Bill on January 22. Details Below.

I just received this alert from the NRA:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)–author of the federal “assault weapon” and “large” ammunition magazine ban of 1994-2004–has said for weeks that she will soon introduce an even more restrictive bill.  Leaders in the U.S. Senate have stated that January 22 will be the first day on which new Senate legislation can be proposed, so that is the most likely date for the new, sweeping legislation to be introduced . . .


On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, ”I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation” and “It will be carefully focused.”  Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012.

According to a Dec. 27th posting on Sen. Feinstein’s website and a draft of the bill obtained by NRA-ILA, the new ban would, among other things, adopt new definitions of “assault weapon” that would affect a much larger variety of firearms, require current owners of such firearms to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act, and require forfeiture of the firearms upon the deaths of their current owners.  Some of the changes in Feinstein’s new bill are as follows:

  • Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms.  The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law.  Feinstein’s new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features.
  • Adopts new lists of prohibited external features.  For example, whereas the 1994 ban applied to a rifle or shotgun the “pistol grip” of which “protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon,” the new bill would drastically expand the definition to include any “grip . . . or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.”  Also, the new bill adds “forward grip” to the list of prohibiting features for rifles, defining it as “a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.” Read literally and in conjunction with the reduction from two features to one, the new language would apply to every detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifle.  At a minimum, it would, for example, ban all models of the AR-15, even those developed for compliance with California’s highly restrictive ban.
  •  Carries hyperbole further than the 1994 ban. Feinstein’s 1994 ban listed “grenade launcher” as one of the prohibiting features for rifles.  Her 2013 bill goes even further into the ridiculous, by also listing “rocket launcher.” Such devices are restricted under the National Firearms Act and, obviously, are not standard components of the firearms Feinstein wants to ban.  Perhaps a subsequent Feinstein bill will add “nuclear bomb,” “particle beam weapon,” or something else equally far-fetched to the features list.
  • Expands the definition of “assault weapon” by including:–Three very popular rifles: The M1 Carbine (introduced in 1941 and for many years sold by the federal government to individuals involved in marksmanship competition), a model of the Ruger Mini-14, and most or all models of the SKS.–Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” except for tubular-magazine .22s.–Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches,” any “semiautomatic handgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” and any semi-automatic handgun that has a threaded barrel.
  • Requires owners of existing “assault weapons” to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA).  The NFA imposes a $200 transfer tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE’s permission to transport the firearm across state lines.
  • Prohibits the transfer of “assault weapons.”  Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs.  However, under Feinstein’s new bill, “assault weapons” would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government.
  • Prohibits the domestic manufacture and the importation of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.  The 1994 ban allowed the importation of such magazines that were manufactured before the ban took effect.  Whereas the 1994 ban protected gun owners from errant prosecution by making the government prove when a magazine was made, the new ban includes no such protection.  The new ban also requires firearm dealers to certify the date of manufacture of any >10-round magazine sold, a virtually impossible task, given that virtually no magazines are stamped with their date of manufacture.
  • Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm “overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose.”  Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines “overwhelmingly chosen” by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds.  Additionally, Feinstein’s list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection.
  • Contains a larger piece of window dressing than the 1994 ban. Whereas the 1994 ban included a list of approximately 600 rifles and shotguns exempted from the ban by name, the new bill’s list is increased to nearly 1,000 rifles and shotguns.  But most of the guns on the list either wouldn’t be banned in the first place, or would already be exempted by other provisions. On the other hand, the list inevitably misses every model of rifle and shotgun that wasn’t being manufactured or imported in the years covered by the reference books Sen. Feinstein’s staff consulted. That means an unknown number of absolutely conventional semi-auto rifles and shotguns, many of them out of production for decades, would be banned under the draft bill.

The Department of Justice study:

     On her website, Feinstein claims that a study for the DOJ found that the 1994 ban resulted in a 6.7 percent decrease in murders.  To the contrary, this is what the study said: “At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons and magazines were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders.  Our best estimate is that the ban contributed to a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders between 1994 and 1995. . . . However, with only one year of post-ban data, we cannot rule out the possibility that this decrease reflects chance year-to-year variation rather than a true effect of the ban.  Nor can we rule out effects of other features of the 1994 Crime Act or a host of state and local initiatives that took place simultaneously.”

“Assault weapon” numbers and murder trends:  From the imposition of Feinstein’s “assault weapon” ban (Sept. 13, 1994) through the present, the number of “assault weapons” has risen dramatically. For example, the most common firearm that Feinstein considers an “assault weapon” is the AR-15 rifle, the manufacturing numbers of which can be gleaned from the BATFE’s firearm manufacturer reports, available here.  From 1995 through 2011, the number of AR-15s–all models of which Feinstein’s new bill defines as “assault weapons”–rose by over 2.5 million. During the same period, the nation’s murder rate fell 48 percent, to a 48-year low. According to the FBI, 8.5 times as many people are murdered with knives, blunt objects and bare hands, as with rifles of any type.

Traces:  Feinstein makes several claims premised on firearm traces, hoping to convince people that her 1994 ban reduced the (already infrequent) use of “assault weapons” in crime.  However, traces do not indicate how often any type of gun is used in crime.  As the Congressional Research Service and the BATFE have explained, not all firearms that are traced have been used in crime, and not all firearms used in crime are traced.  Whether a trace occurs depends on whether a law enforcement agency requests that a trace be conducted. Given that existing “assault weapons” were exempted from the 1994 ban and new “assault weapons” continued to be made while the ban was in effect, any reduction in the percentage of traces accounted for by “assault weapons” during the ban, would be attributable to law enforcement agencies losing interest in tracing the firearms, or law enforcement agencies increasing their requests for traces on other types of firearms, as urged by the BATFE for more than a decade.

Call Your U.S. Senators and Representative:  As noted, Feinstein will most likely introduce her bill on January 22nd.  President Obama has said that gun control will be a “central issue” of his final term in office, and he has vowed to move quickly on it.  And yesterday, a story from The Blaze noted that Obama’s point man on gun control–Vice President Biden–has promised that Obama will pass a gun control bill by the end of the month.

Contact your members of Congress at 202-224-3121 to urge them to oppose Sen. Feinstein’s 2013 gun and magazine ban.  Our elected representatives in Congress must hear from you if we are going to defeat this gun ban proposal.  You can write your Representatives and Senators by using our “Write Your Representatives” tool here: http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-locally/grassroots/write-your-reps.aspx

Millions of Americans own so-called “assault weapons” and tens of millions own “large” magazines, for self-defensetarget shooting, and hunting.  For more information about the history of the “assault weapon” issue, please visit www.GunBanFacts.com.

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

79 Responses to BREAKING: Feinstein to Intro Gun Ban Bill on January 22. Details Below.

  1. avatardirk diggler says:

    I am just grateful Leahy is still chair of judiciary and Cruz is now on the committee

    • avatarSanchanim says:

      Someone needs to contact Mr. Cruz directly.
      Any gun legislation that might pass the Senate and go to the House will be revised to include the following by default:
      1. Immediate repeal of the Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 922(q)

      2. National reciprocity for concealed carry

      3. Change the wording of large capacity magazines from 10 rounds to 150 rounds.

      4. Shall Issue concealed carry for Washington DC residents.

      5. Any confiscation or mandatory buy back will pay to the person fair market value for their firearms. All payments will be made in cash or a form of legal tender which can be deposited by the recipient upon surrender of their firearm.

      6. No state law will infringe on federal law with regard to arms control, or possession requirements.

      Pass it and send it back to the Senate.
      Once the antis are done having conniption fits and wetting themselves they will be faced with one of two things. Neuter our rights at a federal level or drop it. GOP can say they voted for an AWB ban, but gosh it didn’t get passed.

      As unconstitutional as the last request is, it will tie this up in litigation for a decade. Simply put they can try all they want, but we need to demand they compromise. It will also stop all the state legislation, so if the federal law allows a particular type of firearm, well then the states have no say. Yeah I know it is a power grab but this puts it in plane English.

      Item number five will make the law improbable to implement. Right now stripped lowers are going for $600. We know used firearms do not depreciate that much, if at all. With the millions of what would be banned firearms out there, do you think the US could afford to do it? Also making the payment due upon surrender means the government can’t tell you we will pay you at the end of the year or when ever we get around to it.

      • avatarAmy says:

        anyone know a good lawyer? I plan on taking on federal government for infringing my rights! I’m sure half the country will join…… The constitution was put in place to protect us from our own government and protect our rights…slowly one by one the government is chipping away at them until we have a dictator. Don’t you guys think its a little strange that a “documented” mentally unstable white guy in the middle of the most white, crime free area…committed that awful act? This is not a racist statement, just statistics…do not intend to offend anyone

  2. avatarShire-man says:

    It’s an abomination that any legislation could be proposed on the back of having looked at some pictures.

    Is that the measure of research and expertise?

    In that case my hours of playing Command and Conquer qualify me to lead the armed forces of these United States.

    • avatarRalph says:

      my hours of playing Command and Conquer qualify me to lead the armed forces of these United States

      You certainly have more expertise than our commander in chief.

    • avatarBob says:

      The miserable hypocrite is loading as many items in there as possible so they can be used as bargaining chips. She’ll allow some of the provisions to drop in the negotiation process.

      • avatarJoke & Dagger says:

        Keep your eyes on the ball folks. Feinstein is but a distraction. Watch the White House. Obama and Biden’s plans will be of much greater effectiveness. And nefariousness.

  3. avatarSaul Feldstein says:

    Retards (sorry, mentally challenged) can vote, but cant have guns.

    Which is more dangerous?

  4. Representatives written… YET AGAIN, though I keep getting the same non-commital form reply from my local rep.

    • avatarSammy says:

      Yea me too. Every letter sounds like a news recap of the last 6-8 months. Never a mention of the Bill of Rights, let alone the Second Amendment. And the one I’m referring to has an R after his name. This look really bad. I’m not up for being shot to death in front of my family, but neither am I an advocate for caving in on the most important and divisive issue issue since 1864. This Feinstine is an absolute tyrant and should be censured for being anti American and a voter recall initiated. She’s no fool. She knows exactly the carnage that will follow if she and her comrades are successful. Along with the increased dependency on the central government.

  5. avatarPascal says:

    I wonder if the date is being timed with the state of the union for full effect where obama can show pictures of the dead children for more emotional effect.

    Logic in all things govt these days is being thrown out and being replaced with feel good measures.

  6. avatarAndrew says:

    Thanks for posting the link to the NRA-ILA page to write the officials. I sent the form letter you had in a separate post to all in my district and at the federal level. It was very easy to do so. That was the first time in my life I have written to a government official. I don’t think it will be the last time…

  7. avatarMike in NC says:

    What a cruel thing to do to the bat.

  8. avatarBob6180 says:

    I’m just … Baffled (but not really ) at the sheer ignorant will to proffer this ban when facts and logic clearly show that a ban will do nothing but shackle the law abiding citizen.

  9. avatardom says:

    Guys,
    If you think this can’t pass the senate, think again. John McCain, RINO -AZ is currently working with the dems to change senate rules to allow passage with only 50 votes plus Biden.

    Please go to the Gun Owners of America website for full details.

    • avatarRalph says:

      There’s an easy way to stop McCain — insist that all in favor raise their hands.

      • avatarJSIII says:

        Still has no chance in the house. This is all just a set up for the mod tern elections to use against republicans. The pressure on the house right before the elections will be HUGE to compromise.

    • avatarSammy says:

      McCain still has to explain “McCain-Finegold” to me. A raw attack on the 1st amendment and resulted in unleashing super pcas on our electoral system.

  10. avatarCameron S. says:

    Ignorance at it’s very finest. This is nothing but dancing in the blood of children to push a massive load of feel-good-do-nothing bullshit.

    She is a horrible person, despite her supposedly good intentions.

  11. avatarAnon in CT says:

    Be sure to call and email Sen Ted Cruz. He’s pro-gun, on the right committee and has ambitions for higher office, which means he will need to fundraise nationally. Which gives us leverage. Let’s kill this thing in committee.

  12. avatarCold Frog says:

    Senator Feinstein is so disingenous that it is making me physically ill. Her elitist outlook on life is more dangerous than any weapon. Vote her out, California.

    • avatarPascal says:

      You have no idea how disingenous

      Here is her comment to Cpl. Boston’s letter that went viral:

      “Senator Feinstein respects Cpl. Boston’s service. She has heard from thousands of people — including many gun owners — who support her plan to stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of assault weapons and large capacity magazines, strips and drums that hold more than 10 rounds. As Senator Feinstein has said, the legislation will be carefully focused to protect the rights of existing gun owners by exempting hundreds of weapons used for hunting and sporting purposes.”

      Please, tell me what sane gun owners support her plan. I would love to speak with them after I knocked some sense into them. Notice again the “hunting and sporting purposes.” meme — I would to know how many hunters are ready to throw us all under the bus — because they are next they just don’t know it.

      • avatarCold Frog says:

        I don’t believe any true gun owner would support Sen. Feinstein’s proposal. I hope hunters will realize how tenuous their hold on their rifles actually is. I don’t believe writing to Feinstein is beneficial. I think her head is too far up her posterior for her actually to change her mind.

      • avatarWA_2A says:

        Plenty of folks use ARs, SKSs, etc. to hunt. I suspect that as long as the firearms community stays united and does not give in to any of these ludicrous demands, and Congressmen/Senators/Supreme Court judges who support the 2nd amendment are heard, we will be fine.

        That being said, if we let the antis divide and conquer us, or if we are let down by those representing us in Washington…

  13. avatarAnmut says:

    I’ve spent at least $40 in the last week on stamps alone writing letters to state and federal officials. The other night I emailed every senator (all 100 of them) through their website. Yet just one person won’t change the minds – everyone needs to get involved and stay involved until the end.

    What they are going to try to do is three fold:

    1) Create an initial shock that will create a wave of backfire that will eventually fade over the long run of this fight (hence the delayed date for the bill)

    2) Wait long enough for that one gun owner to threaten a public official so they can say “SEE SEE THEY’RE ALL CRAZY!”

    3) Ask for it all and hope that the republicans and NRA compromise on 1/2 or 1/4 of the bill just to shut them up.

    Prepare for the long haul. Prepare to not give an inch. And do it with civility and well thought-out statements. For now.

    • avatarmatt says:

      Maybe this is all a giant conspiracy to keep the USPS from going bankrupt?

    • avatarIn Memphis says:

      “2) Wait long enough for that one gun owner to threaten a public official so they can say “SEE SEE THEY’RE ALL CRAZY!”

      This one actually worries me. I dont personally know any irresponsible gun owners but in the end I can only be accountable for myself. As much as I do not want to think it, part of me has no doubt the above quoted may happen.

      • avatarmatt says:

        What would make someone who did that irresponsible? The DoI (which is codified in to US law under the title of Organic Law) states “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government…” If anything I would think doing so demonstrates they are responsible by carrying out their civic duty.

        • avatarIn Memphis says:

          The way I interprited that Matt was threatening their life not their career. If we start physically threatening the lives of people who are not doing the same, we will look bad.

        • avatarmatt says:

          Well they are threatening our lives. Obama has demonstrated that he will engage in extra-judicial executions of American citizens whos politics he doesnt agree with, just like he did with 16 year old Abdulrahman al-Aulaqi. The FBI has labeled groups such as Occupy Wall Street and the militia movement as terrorist groups, how long do think it’ll be till Americans with evil black guns are labeled the same?

          And who really cares how you look to other people? To many people, evil black rifle owners all ready look bad. People who shoot defenseless deer, pigs and fowl look bad to the likes of PETA. Are you going to appease them by giving up your guns?

        • avatarIn Memphis says:

          I didnt say anything about givig up my guns. I live in a non-registration state and its a shame I never got a bill of sale for selling all of my guns.

          Maybe its too late for you but Im not going to threaten or take lives in the current situation. If WE make the first move of using force, then we face losing a lot of support. There are still fence sitters out there. If the government makes the first move using force, just imagine how many people in this counry will go ape &#!t. I want as many people on our side as possible.

          Trust me, I agree with you on Obamas stance against people who dont agree with him. But if anyone asks, I sold my guns to make a down payment on my car. In my opinion this is not the time for us to make a forceful move.

          Now a peaceful occupy style protest while opencarrying, I can get behind. But it would have to be done in numbers large enough to tax government recources. In other words a couple hundred armed protestors may easily be pacified but a couple thousand would take a bit more. The key words are armed and peaceful. We must show them (the government and world) that the guns we are carryig are not dangerous, nor are we.

        • avatarmatt says:

          Now a peaceful occupy style protest while opencarrying, I can get behind.

          Look at how that worked out for California. They got OC banned because of it. Too bad out here I couldnt take part it out here in Chicago. Our evil black guns and standard cap maps are all ready banned too. Whats kind of funny about our ban, is that if you walk in to any gun store, even a big box, you’ll see plenty of ARs, Saigas, and 10+ round mags… well before the panic buying anyways.

          We must show them (the government and world) that the guns we are carryig are not dangerous, nor are we.
          What do you think will happen when the cops start indiscriminately start gassing people, beating them, and shooting them with bean bags, like they did to the occupy protesters? Thats also assuming they dont bring out the National Guard, and decide to reenact Kent State.

        • avatarIn Memphis says:

          Then we have a revolution in which THEY fired first.

          Thats also why I would emphasize it can only be done in large numbers. If it is a crowd that the police can handle then I forsee exactly what you described happening, again.

          With a large crowd in the thousands they may very well send in the National Guard. Provided things remain peacefull, how many people in this country do you think will back military occupation on US soil for a peacefull demonstration?

        • avatarSilver says:

          -We must show them (the government and world) that the guns we are carrying are not dangerous, nor are we.-

          Government has become the tyranny it is exactly because they think we’re not dangerous.

        • avatarmatt says:

          Provided things remain peacefull, how many people in this country do you think will back military occupation on US soil for a peacefull demonstration?

          The same number of people who still support the military and hold service members in high regard, even though they are the organization who has deliberately killed the most amount of American civilians in history, more than an order of magnitude than Al-qaeda ever accomplished. The same type of people who call Eisenhower, MacArthur and Patton, the greatest generation, even though they brutally assaulted 17,000 WW1 veterans, their wives and children, with rifles, bayonets, tanks and a arsenic based chemical weapon in 1932.

      • avatarIn Memphis says:

        Silver, guns are not dangerous. People are. The Government needs to fear us, not guns. Peoples fear of guns is what give the grabbers their power

    • avatarJames says:

      Sounds like a dilemma….40 bucks on postage or 40 bucks on a Pmag. What to do?

  14. avatarjwm says:

    The SKS? It has a 10 round fixed mag. Why is it gonna be banned? The mini 14 is the state rifle of California. Do the Ca. G employees have to turn in their Rugers?

    • avatarmatt says:

      I know i’ve seen plenty of SKSes which take a detachable 30 rounds.

      • avatarjwm says:

        The SKS has to be modified to take a non standard 10 round mag. I personally prefer the SKS to the AK. They don’t feel as clumsy and they shoot better. IMHO.

        • avatarmatt says:

          Plus they have that built in bayonet. More guns need to come with those as standard equipment… just in case you’re charged by calvary.

        • avatarjwm says:

          The price of gas nowadays and the calvary is looking more and more viable.

  15. avatarKMTW says:

    A guy that tried to post a copy of the Feinstein Bill, and a link to NRA contact your congressmen webpage, was vicously attacked the GUNBOARDS FORUM message board, but the board owners and moderators. He was banned from the site, his password and profile signature hacked, and changed to a derogatory remark- and threatened with this email below from the board owner/moderator. There seems to be “plants” in these online message boards, who are actually proponents of strict gun control, see below- he was threatened with being data mined on the site, and all the information sent to law enforcement, and accused of being an Anarchist. Can you believe this crap ?

    —– Original Message —–
    From: mhc1@comcast.net
    Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 9:22 AM

    I believe that you are seriously disturbed and your paranoid schizophrenia is not a trait that we look for or welcome in a member. Your privileges were revoked on a private site and your membership was conditional based upon your postings which were veering into some significantly disturbing comments. Gunboards.com does not sell guns- we talk about them and share information on collecting. We have in the past and will continue to cooperate with local state and federal law enforcement agencies in reporting members or guests who have or have attempted to break the law or who in their posts, exhibit significant worry as to the intent of the member or the safety of our membership and the public. In this circumstance and specifically to your recent posts and your current threats to many members and myself, it may be warranted to forward a transcription of all of your postings and correspondence to any LEO’s involved. Your anarchist slanted postings and replies seem to exhibit a rather serious mental imbalance and construe a possible threat to the safety of others.

    • avatarmatt says:

      Those fvcking anarchists with their black flags. It makes me sick everytime time I see one that someone would be audacious enough to think that the government could do something wrong. We ought to execute them without cause just like we did to those at the Haymarket massacre who were demanding a 8 hour work day.

  16. avatarmiforest says:

    if this passes , the GOP has seen my last vote and $ forever.

    • avatarSammy says:

      I think that accounts for some of the Democratic enthusiasm for this bill. If it passes the R’s will be swept for the American political discourse and leave us with a monotone congress. NOT A GOOD IDEA.

    • avatarJon says:

      Agreed. My GOP votes last November will have been my last. I’ll begin to put my time and money into libertarian candidates instead if the GOP gives an inch on new gun legislation.

  17. avatarShooter says:

    SKS, M1 Carbine, and Mini 14 are all going to be banned? That is crazy. This bill has almost no chance of passing through the house. Also, you have to remember guys like Rand Paul will filibuster the bill and it will need 60 votes just to pass the senate.

    • avatarchris says:

      +1 for Rand Paul. He tried to filibuster the extension of FISA ( govt can search any emails, social media, wiretap etc without warrant) saying it goes against the 4th and was voted down 79-12. I would vote for him and those 11 others that understand the constitution any day.

  18. avatarThomas Paine says:

    i’m waiting to see what happens in IL and NY first.

    Also, i hope it can get trapped in committee for awhile, until everybody realizes that the debt ceiling is more important when the country runs out of money in late Feb.

    • avatarIn Memphis says:

      I dont know much about the politics of IL and NY but I wouldnt wait around for them. We already know how they feel. We should support their pro 2A supporters but we do need to take action at a federal level now.

  19. avatarSilver says:

    FOAD to all of them.

  20. avatarHal says:

    Haha. Great job difi. You’ve made this bill so insane that it is guaranteed to be DOA in the house.

    BTW, how old are you Senator? I will be looking forward to the day when you’re playing peaknuckle with Ted Kennedy in hell. Fvck off.

    • avatarSammy says:

      I take every day without “The Liberal Lion” as one better than the day before. He was as duplicitous as they come, and a murderer as well.

  21. avatarLance says:

    Call Sen Cruz and give him the thanks to kill the hags bill. Call all progun reps and say no to a AWB.

  22. avatarROger.45 says:

    On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, ”I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation” and “It will be carefully focused.” (From the text of your post.)

    I thought this was a response to the cowardly, horrific murders in Newtown, Connecticut?

    If her staff has been working on this proposed bill for a year, aren’t they using the tragedy for something other than keeping everyone safe from the evils of private firearm ownership?

  23. avatarMr. Anderson says:

    I won’t ever register anything but my truck

  24. avatarValley Forge Resident says:

    THIS IS UNCONSCIONABLE!

    She wants to force millions of Law-abiding citizens to register like sex-offenders and never be able to sell or pass on our assets to our heirs, but instead have to FORFEIT them to the Government???

    That is the most unbelievable, unconstitutional thing I have ever heard!

    How in any way does that ‘protect, uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America’? Any politician who votes for this is directly violating their oath to their country and the people they serve!

    I have not been a very politically active person in the past, and all of a sudden I am. I swear by God I will never vote for another Democrat as long as I live and will actively persuade every one I know to do the same. I will also actively seek to vote out of office any politician that supports such a heinous assault on our Constitution and our property – Republican, Independent or otherwise.

    I have a 15k gun collection. Am I never to be allowed to sell it if I need to – never allowed to pass this on to my heirs, but have to FORFEIT it to the Government? That is totally intolerable and a grievous violation of my rights as a law abiding American Citizen!

    I would like to say what Feinstein can do with her socialist, Anti-American, attack on our Constitution, but my mores will not permit me to do so.

    I swear by God, they have stepped on the third rail with this one. I’m awake now, Diane. And I have never been more angry and offended in all my God-given life. There is NO logic to your proposal. NONE. It would do nothing to prevent another horrible atrocity from being committed by a raving lunatic. More people are murdered every year with hammers and clubs than rifles. MANY more people are killed (and lives ruined) by alcohol. Are you going to propose to ban alcohol and hammers now? Almost every analogy to alcohol can be applied to firearms, with alcohol BY FAR representing the much greater threat to our collective health. What’s next Diane – ban alcohol? Ban hammers? have us all walking in line like a bunch of sheep wearing the same (government approved) clothes and all driving the same (government approved) cars and eating the same (government approved) food and reading the same (government approved) news? This is an atrocity. This is the beginnings of a POLICE STATE. In the past, someone like this would have been black-balled as a communist – for trying to disarm our country, rape our Constitution and turn us into some socialist, defenseless nation of panzies!

    I am awake now, Diane. You have very disgracefully used a tragic event to further your own socialist, anti-American agenda and attack and punish 100 million law-abiding citizens, who were as aggrieved as anyone by the horrible incident in CT. You have no idea of the wrath that you have incurred. I will use all peaceable means at my disposal for the remainder of my life to see that any politician that supported this atrocity be voted from office and destroyed politically. I will hereby devote all of my available time, energy and money to fighting ANY attack on our 2nd Amendment rights. I will accept NOTHING now. No compromise. Nothing. You wanted a conversation? Well guess what. You’re going to get a hell of a lot more than that now. You come out and slap 100 million Americans in the face with this disgraceful attack and expect to have a conversation? Ba ha ha. You have sewn the wind Miss Feinstein, now it’s time to reap the whirlwind.

    I was born in Philadelphia and was raised in Valley Forge PA. I think of all that our Founding Fathers said and did and created. I know to someone like Feinstein that is just ‘quaint’ – to reference our Constitution and our Founding Fathers, but it isn’t for me. I walk less than a mile down the road and I see exactly where George Washington formed up an American Militia, made of people just like us – 230+ year ago. Honest citizens who would rather DIE FREE than be subjects to a tyrant. You folks all know the quotes. You know the history. You know what happened. Apparently to someone like Feinstein, our Constitution, our history, is just a ‘quaint relic’ of the past.

    I will never accept such a violation to all that I hold dear as an American – our freedom, our history, our inalienable rights.

    I am awake now, Diane. And if you woke me up, I’m guessing you’ve awaken a sleeping giant. A giant mass of red-blooded, law-abiding Americans who will not stand idly by and watch you desecrate all that is holy to us. Will not sit idly by and watch your blind ignorance destroy our country and rob us of our freedoms.

    230+ years later, here we are: standing at the crossroads of Liberty and Tyranny – and I find the words of our Founding Fathers repeating in my head. Give me Liberty or give me Death. If I’m not willing to put my life on the line for what THEY did so many year ago, then I don’t deserve to be free. I don’t deserve to walk this ground that I live on. I don’t deserve to call myself an American.

    I am awake now, Miss Feinstein and I’m mad as hell.

    -Valley Forge, PA

  25. avatarAlphaGeek says:

    Can we please tone down the anti-liberal hatred and focus on the real problem, which is EVERY legislator who treats the Bill Of Rights like an ala carte menu?

    Last time I checked there were plenty of folks on BOTH sides of the aisle who, as individuals, were all too glad to throw our rights under the bus. Not just 2A rights, but warrant less wiretaps, “extraordinary rendition”, and torture.

    Apparently today is one of those days where my own side raises my blood pressure more than the opposition, what with the dark tinfoil-hat muttering and the “liberals are destroying this country” bullshit. America is great because of our differences, not in spite of them. What has changed, for the worse, is that we have become so polarized in our thinking that now everything is a bitter us-vs-them deathmatch instead of a vigorous debate and then moving forward together.

    • avatarSilver says:

      -America is great because of our differences, not in spite of them.-

      When the differences are things that take a backseat to the primary goal of actually being spiritually American, then yes. The proverbial “melting pot” that enabled people from all sorts of countries to find a common place of freedom and opportunity, that’s what you mean.

      The differences between modern “progressives” and true “conservatives” is not some superficial or heritage-based pride. The differences between those who desire tyranny and those who desire freedom are not “differences that make us stronger.” That’s like saying the differences between the Allies and the Nazis are just opinions that made the world stronger.

      There’s also a stark difference between true liberal and “progressive,” just as there’s a difference between Republican and true conservative. Democrats as whole may not be destroying the country, but progressives are, and they wear both an R and a D in front of their names.

  26. avatarCold Frog says:

    How do we counteract the MEDIA? in my opinion, they seem really biased against guns?

  27. avatarSanchanim says:

    Well at least we now have a date, so I am hoping that the phones and emails will be jammed during those days leading up to and on the day of the bill introduction.

    • avatarLance says:

      I agree to keep the pressure bt we dont really know when this bill will come. NRA even I can only make a educated guess so we musts remain vigilant Sanchanim!

  28. avatarpat says:

    Didnt the US see the killing power of other things (bombs, boxcutters in planes, etc…)? Tyrants will reap what they sow. All hail the power of the libtard.

  29. avatarMike says:

    Stupid ignorant bitch.

  30. avatarMarc says:

    Wow the government using sandy as an excuse to disarm us completely because they know they’ve already stolen our homes destroyed all our wealth and an uprising looms. Sad you used sandy as an excuse on a bill over a year in the making wouldn’t be surprised if they had something to do with these shooings to push for support are we to stand by and let these people steal our only mean of defense against them!? The constitution means shit and this country is shit run by shit tired of these people takin everything in own and worked for come for my guns and I’ll let you have the business end promise you

  31. avatarChris Schiller says:

    Is the government (Feds) going to allow a person using legalized marijuana own a gun?

  32. avatarJosie says:

    This bi#$h makes me want to buy more guns and ammo. Demcrates need to get a life in some other country and get out of ours.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.