Gun Control - Abstracts of what Feinstein is going to introduce in the Senate

[irishScott]

The problem with any bill promoted by Dianne Feinstein and any of her ilk is that it starts from a premise that people should not be allowed to have ANY weapons. She said it herself after the last AWB, she said (paraphrased), "If I could have gotten all of them, round them up and turn them in, I would have done it." She is NOT interested in protecting the rights of hunters, she'd probably just as soon have that practice outlawed as well. Anything she says otherwise is just paying lip service to that voting block.

I'd actually be OK with stricter requirements for purchasing, proficiency testing requirements, some sort of storage requirements (not sure of the practicalities of that), waiting periods, training classes from certified instructors, medical evaluation, etc. as long as I finally get to have whatever I want. I don't know what the particulars of all of that would be, but honestly it isn't that big a deal if in the end I get to have whatever I want. Gun rights advocates get soooo up in arms about any legislation whatsoever regarding guns - we really need to be more pragmatic about it and learn to pick our battles between what really matters. Or we get shit like this Feinstein garbage. It's kind of like dealing with teabaggers and the fiscal cliff. Absolutely no room for negotiation with them, therefore we're going to end up with a calamity that nobody wants.

The goal should be to keep the guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them, and allow me to have whatever I want. The problem however, is that people like Dianne Feinstein, aren't really interested in the second half of that statement.

This. A million x this.

 

[HumblePie]

Triumph, the only problems that people have with your assertions is the fact the Constitution says no infringement, and that if you give them an inch they want a mile. I know it's a cliche catch phrase but I hope you understand.

 

[WackyDan]

None of which would have stopped CT shooting. Can't punish as dead person.

Biggest hurdle here is anything remotely sensible still wouldn't have stopped someone who shouldn't have had weapons from taking them from somebody who was allowed to have then and who provide access to them, so then the next logical step on the left is just ban them for everyone.

She didn't expect to end up dead and it seemed she trusted him around her firearms based on their trips to the range... She made a mistake in judgement but she probably never expected to wide up dead. It is an outlier of sorts no?

Point was... the gun control crowd likes to point to stolen weapons as one of the biggest issues of legal gun ownership... You attempt to address that issue and nullify that complaint. I secure my weapons 24/7 unless they are on my person, or at the bed side while I am in bed. I cringe at the thought of someone stealing one of my weapons, as I'd hate for them to be used in an illicit manner or lose one of the several family hand me down firearms in my possession. All owners should be that responsible or face penalty. It is the one harmless control we can allow to take that complaint away from them.

 

[TallBill]

I thought I had read some where that the .22LR is one of the most common, if not the most common, caliber used in gun homicides. I'll have to look that up later but I'm almost certain I had read that statistic somewhere.

Could be true, my statement stands.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Ironically she is responsible for a metric shitton MORE of those weapons and magazines in private hands today.

I wonder if she holds stock in firearm manufacturing companies? That would be a great racket; make statements and propose legislation you know are certain to spur massive increases in gun sales and reap the benefits.

 

[TerryMathews]

I wonder if she holds stock in firearm manufacturing companies? That would be a great racket; make statements and propose legislation you know are certain to spur massive increases in gun sales and reap the benefits.

Could be. Theoretically the STOCK act prohibits this sort of activity but it's never been put to the test.

 

[Darwin333]

I wonder if she holds stock in firearm manufacturing companies? That would be a great racket; make statements and propose legislation you know are certain to spur massive increases in gun sales and reap the benefits.

Lol, that would make sense.

Another thing to note is that New York newspaper just gave us one hell of a reason to not want gun registrations of any sort.

 

[piasabird]

http://news.yahoo.com/chicago-reaches-500-homicides-fatal-shooting-145951769.html

Chicago had its 500th Homicide this year. Do you really think banning guns works?

I think some of these cases where a person takes weapons that are not theirs shows that weapns should be locked up or secured in some way.

 

[irishScott]

http://news.yahoo.com/chicago-reaches-500-homicides-fatal-shooting-145951769.html

Chicago had its 500th Homicide this year. Do you really think banning guns works?

I think some of these cases where a person takes weapons that are not theirs shows that weapns should be locked up or secured in some way.

Yeah, but the issue is we have close to 300 million guns floating around. Even assuming that's several guns to one owner, that's still over 50 million households. Random checks would likely be very ineffective without ballooning the ATF. Plus it would require a national registry.

 

[Engineer]

It's extreme and won't go anywhere. It'll get watered down if anything at all passes, but considering the Congress can't even pass a budget or compromise on this "fiscal cliff" this whole thing is a non-starter.

This. Not going to happen (and I didn't even read the OP - just know how Feinstein is).

 

[exdeath]

Yeah, but the issue is we have close to 300 million guns floating around. Even assuming that's several guns to one owner, that's still over 50 million households. Random checks would likely be very ineffective without ballooning the ATF. Plus it would require a national registry.

I'd predict the opposite effect of thinning the ATF... /snicker

All out door to door confiscation would be the final straw.

 

[Muse]

The goal should be to keep the guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them, and allow me to have whatever I want. The problem however, is that people like Dianne Feinstein, aren't really interested in the second half of that statement.

You can't always have your cake and eat it too.

 

[Zargon]

In Illinois you already have to submit your fingerprints for a background check before you can purchase any firearm. Illinois is already a police state.

No, you don't.


the State PD supposedly runs a NCIC check, and if you pass, you get a FOID and all you need to do then is wait after you purchase it, unless you buy private party

 

[marvdmartian]

What do you expect from that loon? She's the same one that, when the country had a rash of "air rage" incidents (that were tied to excessive alcohol imbibement), wanted to pass a new law that would prohibit anyone flying domestically from having more than 2 alcoholic drinks per flight.

Yeah.....like they couldn't start drinking in the airport bar, huh Diane??

 

[BladeVenom]

She is insane, stupid, and completely dishonest.

She also carries a gun.

 

[dmens]

Good summary for gun owners: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=JDglpt8hpyg