DiFi Exhibits Lack of Firearms Knowledge. Again. Still.

By Tim from the Military Arms Channel

Today we got another peek inside the dank mind of Dianne Feinstein. She sat before a committee rambling on about things she knows absolutely nothing about — firearms. As she was trying to explain why the proposed AWB isn’t about cosmetics, an aide showed this cue card. Take a look at the “barrel shroud”. Yup, Mrs. Feinstein wants to ban front hand guards which she inaccurately calls a “barrel shroud”. This ignorance tops the previous ignorance captured in the proposed AWB bill where she mentions grenade launchers (already banned), rocket launchers (don’t exist) and forward pistol grips on handguns (already banned). This woman knows absolutely nothing about the firearms she’s trying to ban. See the whole sorry display after the jump . . .

72 Responses to DiFi Exhibits Lack of Firearms Knowledge. Again. Still.

  1. avatarBrennan says:

    Even if she named it properly, how the hell does the hand guard make my scary black gun shoot faster?

    • avatarChris says:

      Because unicorns

    • avatarWilliam says:

      The diagram hinted it made it “spray faster”. Maybe you squeeze the durn thing to make it go faster. Or make it go up.

      • avatarRuss Bixby says:

        You squeeze really hard, and the resulting compression/shrinkage of the barrel results in reduced pressure loss due to leakage around the periphery of the slug.

        This results in an increase of both muzzle velocity and the speed of action of the, er, action.

        Yeah, that must be it.

      • avatarDaveL says:

        I believe what she’s thinking about there is properly termed an “udder.”

      • avatarJim D says:

        It works like a ketchup dispenser maybe? Just squeeze it right and it’ll make fart sounds??? She is clueless, but you already knew that.

    • avatarSpeleoFool says:

      I’m guessing the theory is that the “barrel shroud” enables a shooter to use the “Chris Costa grip” to keep the Scary Black Gun on target so it can shoot more accurately when firing rapidly.

      Regardless of the rationale, however, couldn’t a hypothetical mass shooter just grip their “shroudless” hot barrel with an oven mitt? :)

  2. avatarLance says:

    Took you this long to know the Kaliforian hag is brainless like shes ugly!

  3. avatarmountocean says:

    If you wrapped a wet rag around the barrel to keep your hand from burning would that make it an assault rifle of death?
    How about if I wear a leather glove? On the other hand, I actually have been assaulted with a leather glove…

    • avatarRuss Bixby says:

      A dry rag, methinks. Wet would conduct the heat to your nubbies.

      Toss it in a conveniently empty metal litter basket once it starts to smoke and grab another.

      Don’t get caught with a packet o’ more’n seven rags, though.

  4. avatarRuss Bixby says:

    Does this mean I have to remove the barrel cover on my Mosin?!?

  5. avatarnerd_nurd says:

    if a front stock is a barrel shroud, then i guess the m1a has a barrel shroud

  6. avatarJoe Grine says:

    I’m trying to think of a rifle that doesn’t have a “barrel shroud” under that definition. Hmmm.

  7. avatarBLAMMO says:

    Whenever I hear the name “Dianne Feinstein”, all that comes to mind is “Die in a Fire”.

  8. avatarSammy says:

    I’m starting to get the feeling that this (DiFi’s Herring Hearings) might just be a win win for the administration. To wit, Ban passes DiFi wins- Ban doesn’t pass o wins because we are fighting so many fronts we don’t notice that the congress trying to appoint o dictator, and I not referring to a tuber named Richard. Population, er, gun control isn’t the only thing going on. Speaking for myself, it is the most important thing going on, but not the only thing. This guy is releasing imprisoned illegals, threatening Bob Woodward thereby what little critical press he gets. The AG WON”T rule out domestic drone hits. And on and on. Meet the real obama. Tin foil crap? That’s what they said about an AWB pre 2012. The writing on the wall becomes clearer every day.

  9. avatarBrooklyn in da house says:

    Oy gevalt !

  10. avatarJohn says:

    I live in CA and I emailed Dianne Feinstein my opposition to her new legislation. She did write me back what I find most inserting is she has been in office for 40 years and will be 80 in June. She did not care what I think about her legislation if your read the letter she is telling me she will do what ever she feels is is appropriate. Because she has had families tell her that they no longer feel safe. Lies Lies

    Dear John:

    Thank you for contacting me to share your opposition to assault weapons legislation. I respect your opinion on this important issue and welcome the opportunity to provide my point of view.

    Mass shootings are a serious problem in our country, and I have watched this problem get worse and worse over the 40 years I have been in public life. From the 1966 shooting rampage at the University of Texas that killed 14 people and wounded 32 others, to the Newtown massacre that killed 20 children and 6 school teachers and faculty, I have seen more and more of these killings. I have had families tell me that they no longer feel safe in a mall, in a movie theater, in their business, and in other public places, because these deadly weapons are so readily available. These assault weapons too often fall into the hands of grievance killers, juveniles, gangs, and the deranged.

    I recognize that the Second Amendment provides an individual right to bear arms, but I do not believe that right is unlimited or that it precludes taking action to prevent mass shootings. Indeed, in the same Supreme Court decision that recognized the individual right to bear arms, District of Columbia v. Heller, the Court also held that this right, like other constitutional rights, is not unlimited. That is why assault weapons bans have consistently been upheld in the courts, both before and after the Heller decision. I believe regulation of these weapons is appropriate.

    Once again, thank you for your letter. Although we may disagree, I appreciate hearing from you and will be mindful of your thoughts as the debate on this issue continues. If you have any additional comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841. senator@feinstein.senate.gov

    Don’t like what you see email her !!! We will not stop until we win this fight !!

  11. avatarRandy Drescher says:

    But she is available for couger dating isn’t she? Tell me she isn’t all booked up already. Its a bit difficult to take that witch seriously, Randy

    • avatarIn Memphis says:

      Id rather be eaten alive by a real cougar

    • avatarJohn Mood says:

      Being the spelling champ of my 8th grade class, I must inform you Randy it’s spelled with a “B” not a “W”….

      The woman is definitely meshuginah, and in photos has demonstrated her complete ignorance of weapon safety by pointing a AR-15 toward people, clip in place (God only knows if there was a round chambered) and having her ugly, shriveled, crone finger INSIDE the trigger guard.

      I rest my case, it’s a “B”, not a “W”….

  12. avatarChuckN says:

    What’s infuriating is that not a single congressman will
    stand up and loadly proclaim that DiFi knows precisely
    jack about firearms. Seriously, 12 years old who play
    Call of Duty know enough about guns to shool the
    old moonbat, but we can’t get a single legislator to
    publicly confront her.

  13. avatarKakaduDreamer says:

    The funniest part of this entire thing is the bump slide fire video where the little old lady shot it and laughed, briefly interrupting DiFi in her presentation!

    Everything else about this I am not amused…

  14. avatarJMS says:

    Ah the dreaded spray firing.

    • avatarMMGG says:

      From the hip. Always from the hip.

      • avatarBuuurr says:

        At least it isn’t turned sideways… that’s a kill shot! But seriously… from the hip, hand on the barrel shroud, arm on the thingy that goes up, trigger on the ‘pistol’ grip, fully loaded hi-cap clip of 900 rounds and turned sideways!

        I think I just invented a fully-auto nuke!

  15. avatarJLR says:

    There may be more to this than it first appears.

    Keep in mind that legal definitions don’t have to match up with common usage, the whole “assault weapon” nomenclature is evidence of that. Laws generally have sections that define specific terms. Where certain terms are left ambiguous by the legislation, courts often look to the lawmaker’s intention when attempting to interpret it.

    This is the definition of “barrel shroud” that was included in the 1994 AWB:

    “a shroud that is attached to, or partially or
    completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the
    shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand
    without being burned;”

    As written, that could easily be interpreted to mean that a handguard is a prohibited feature. Just because the ATF chose not to interpret it that way, doesn’t mean they couldn’t have.

    They wouldn’t even have to interpret it that way right away. Years later they could quietly change a regulatory decision, citing the intent of the legislator who wrote the law to decide they’d been misinterpreting it all along.

  16. avatarDarkstar says:

    ‘Ol Di-Fi clearly is a freakin’ moron. The real problem though is the fact that so many will eat up all her dis-information, lies, and bullshit and believe it to be straight from the burning bush. Control the language, control the debate. Those ignorant about firearms will believe what they are told. Hook. Line. Sinker.

  17. avatarPowers says:

    You cant have pistol grips, you cant have so called “barrel shrouds” or basically the handguards..how in the hell are you supposed to hold a f’ing rifle?

    This woman must be the dumbest piece of motel room bed spread stain in the world.

  18. avatarCaptain Catsup says:

    I would like to propose a ban on politicians who are clueless about the legislation the propose. Good Lord, I can’t wait for the next election!

  19. avatarAnon in CT says:

    Honestly, how is bump-fire legal?

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      Because it still only fires one round per pull of the trigger.

    • avatarpat says:

      Notice how slowly the dude pulled the trigger in the semiauto portion before the bump-fire thingy was demonstrated as a comparison.

    • avatarAlphaGeek says:

      Bump fire stocks and similar pseudo-full-auto devices are fscking horrible from a PR perspective, and I wish people would voluntarily take down their YouTube videos of their use.

      Also, they’re not banned by the Feds (yet) but states are getting wise to the fact that they’re effectively full-auto conversion kits. Bump/slide fire systems are definitively illegal in CA.

  20. avatarGw says:

    The Preamble to The Bill of Rights
    Excerpt as follows:
    “Congress of the United States
    begun and held at the City of New-York, on
    Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.
    THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
    RESOLVED…”
    Amendment II “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

    source: http://archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

    [ Note carefully the words, ‘in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added’…
    and quite clearly were. ]

    Obvious question: where in the Constitution of the United States is the authority necessary for members in the Federal Congress to designate semi-automatic firearms as ‘assault weapons’, attempt to regulate the capacity of magazines and enact the laws being proposed?

  21. avatarJim says:

    Did anyone notice here wording at 3:29 – she says that the California Assault Weapons ban has been effective at “reducing the availability” of the guns. Did you catch that? She didn;t say that it had reduced crime or homicides, just that it reduced the “availabilty”.

    By the way, that tends to happen when you make something illegal.

  22. avatarDon1974 says:

    Check this true story out; at the exact moment I started to watch this video Alice Cooper’s song “Hey Stoopid” started to play on my radio. This absolutely cannot be a coincidence!

  23. avatarg says:

    OMG! Shrouds! OMG!

    I think Mrs. DiFi is way beyond hope when it comes to understanding ANYTHING technical about firearms. You’d have better luck teaching a 6 month year old baby the Pythagorean Theorem.

    • avatarAlphaGeek says:

      It’s not stupidity. It’s indifference.

      If she could get people on board with banning a class of guns by calling a particular feature a “military assault baby mutilator” she would.

      She gets the terminology wrong not only because she doesn’t care, but also because she knows it drives us insane. Don’t let the (rhetorical) terrorists win.

  24. avatarBadger 8-3 says:

    Instead of bread and circuses, we have DiFi and barrel shrouds. Damn, where’s McCarthy, at least the “shoulder thingy that goes up” or whatever verbal diarrhea she spouted made me laugh.

    People actually hold this ignoramus up as some kind of beacon on a hill, when they should be chastising her for wasting our time with this chickenshit when there are actual issues that need to be addressed.

    I need a minute…
    EXPLETIVES REDACTED AD NAUSEUM.
    Right…

    We deserve what our apathy has created. Let me know when you have a real plan to defeat the threat to our nation’s future, and have stopped squabbling over how stupid the antis are. Assuming your enemy is ignorant and failing to respect them is one of the most fatal, and ancient, mistakes you can make in warfare, and YOU, Robert, Dan and Nick, have fallen for it hook, line, and sinker. I expect better from you. Hell, I’ve seen better from you. Yeah, sensationalism sells, I get it. You run a business of creating headlines and articles people want to read, I get it. But ya know, you all have the chance to be the next Poor Freakin’ Richard in the firearms crusade and you’re blowing it. Don’t think Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Adams, et al, made their mark on history by writing op ed pieces about how terrible King George’s robes looked. You get people with sensationalism, but you keep them with substance. I’d be happier with two or three well-researched posts a day, detailing exactly what the latest disarmament bill means, piece by piece. By now, it’s old hat that DiFi doesn’t know a shroud from a guard. Let’s get past it.

    Badger 8-3

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      I like the cut of your jib, sir.

    • avatarAlphaGeek says:

      Right there with you, Badger. Every word wasted denigrating Feinstein’s appearance, or underestimating her intelligence, is a word that could have been written in effective opposition to her work.

      Her appearance is irrelevant.

      She is an intelligent woman who chooses to present the appearance of being ignorant about firearms. She’s a Senator with boatloads of seniority — you’d better believe she has top-notch staff supporting her.

      She wants to ban civilian ownership of guns because she believes it will improve society, full stop. Her inaccurate terminology, and the anger it induces in people who know guns, just masks the fact that she’s trying to ban private firearms ownership any way she can, step by step.

      • avatarDaveL says:

        She is an intelligent woman who chooses to present the appearance of being ignorant about firearms. She’s a Senator with boatloads of seniority — you’d better believe she has top-notch staff supporting her.

        Mitt Romney is an intelligent man with a long history in politics, and the best campaign staff money can buy – but he still was apparently taken by surprise that he lost the 2012 election, even when every mainstream source pointed to it as a probable outcome.

        It’s called epistemic closure. It’s entirely possible for Feinstein to truly be this ignorant about guns, although I’m sure she considers herself very well-informed. If her staff is stocked with gun-control “true believers”, you can bet that:

        A) None of them really know much about guns, no matter how well-educated they are in general; and
        B) They tend to be highly selective about their sources for information about guns.

      • avatarJP says:

        “She is an intelligent woman …”

        Thanks for the LOL.

    • avatarJohn Mood says:

      I always was taught (by some very knowledgeable folks at the police academy) that the “shroud’ was actually the forearm of the rifle, and meant to help steady the aim so one could control where the round ended up.

      THAT is gun control.

      Ms. Feinstein needs to shut up about that which she knows absolutely nothing. Now she is making things up to support her twisted and addle-brained arguments.

  25. avatarTRP says:

    Please pray for us poor fools here in CA. While I love the climate, the nuts in Sacramento are running everybody out of the state except The Takers….

  26. avatarlittlemike says:

    She is the personification of institutionally intentional ignorance.

  27. avatarTheSleeperHasAwakened says:

    “facilitate rapid spray firing”

    What facilitates rapid spray firing is having a uniform and a badge, just ask any LAPD or NYPD officer.

Leave a Reply

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