Feinstein, McCarthy Unveil Strengthened Assault Weapons Ban

Jan 24, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Roll Call

Democrats in both chambers unveiled legislation they are introducing Thursday that would reinstate and considerably strengthen the expired federal ban on assault weapons and large ammunition magazines.

Comments (Page 20)

Showing posts 381 - 400 of529
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#399
Jan 29, 2013
 
Canon wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no such thinga as an "assault" rifle....it's a BOGUS term to scare you...it worked!
There is a federal definition as well as 7 state definitions.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#400
Jan 29, 2013
 
Marauder wrote:
<quoted text>
I do...and not you or the gov't are going to take any of them.
Next
Then show me where in the constitution or a SCOTUS ruling it says you specifically have a right to own an AR-15 or any other assault rifle?

You may have the ABILITY to own one, but you don't currently have the RIGHT to own one.

Of course you can't understand the difference.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#401
Jan 29, 2013
 
Marauder wrote:
<quoted text>
Civilian semi-auto version came first....then the select fire military version.
From what I've read Armalite developed it for military use first.

Either way, it doesn't really matter.
Canon

Texarkana, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#402
Jan 29, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, still don't see where the constitution says you can own an AR-15.
The SCOTUS has only ruled you have a right to own a handgun in your own home for self defense. That's why the bans on assault weapons in 7 states still stand.
People need to be reminded the scotus is NOT the all powerful and was NEVER intented to be.....they have taken the power, you have given them the power.........they do NOT have all power and was NEVER intended to be that way. They are NOT God.
Canon

Texarkana, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#403
Jan 29, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
You may have the ABILITY to own one, but you don't currently have the RIGHT to own one.
Bull Malarkey!!

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#404
Jan 29, 2013
 
Eric Gustafson wrote:
South Carolina and Mississippi tried that 150 years ago...... that state nullification didn't work out in their favor.
Those that forget are doomed to repeat the same mistakes.
<quoted text>
I agree 100%. So why do you keep trying to make communism work?

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#405
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Canon wrote:
<quoted text>
People need to be reminded the scotus is NOT the all powerful and was NEVER intented to be.....they have taken the power, you have given them the power.........they do NOT have all power and was NEVER intended to be that way. They are NOT God.
But they ARE the final word on what's constitutional or not.

If you don't like our system of government, then feel free to lobby to change it. That's one of the ACTUAL rights you have which the SCOTUS has upheld.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#406
Jan 29, 2013
 
Canon wrote:
<quoted text>
Bull Malarkey!!
Then go to New York (or any of the 7 states which ban them) and exercise your supposed right to buy an assault rifle.......
Canon

Texarkana, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#407
Jan 29, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
But they ARE the final word on what's constitutional or not.
If you don't like our system of government, then feel free to lobby to change it. That's one of the ACTUAL rights you have which the SCOTUS has upheld.
I'm telling you the original way it was. They render opinions NOT judgements.
Canon

Texarkana, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#408
Jan 29, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Then go to New York (or any of the 7 states which ban them) and exercise your supposed right to buy an assault rifle.......
I don't go to commie states.
Tray

New Albany, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#409
Jan 29, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Then show me where in the constitution or a SCOTUS ruling it says you specifically have a right to own an AR-15 or any other assault rifle?
You may have the ABILITY to own one, but you don't currently have the RIGHT to own one.
Of course you can't understand the difference.
Well well well. Caught with your drawers down again. You changed from "assault weapon" to "assault rifle". Assault rifle is a military term and requires the gun to be FULL AUTO which the AR15 is not. SCOTUS does not have to give me permission it is a right which they can't rule on because the Constitution tells them they can't. In case you have not noticed SCOTUS has dodged that question for 200 years and still does today. They have refused to hear hundreds of cases on the right to keep and bear because they can't hear them legally. By the way I own several now because I have the right to and as bad as you wish you could do something about it you can't because you DON'T have the right to.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#410
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Canon wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm telling you the original way it was. They render opinions NOT judgements.
And their opinion is the final word.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#411
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Canon wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't go to commie states.
Then all you can truthfully say is you currently have the right to buy and own an assault rifle in Texas.
Tray

New Albany, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#412
Jan 29, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
From what I've read Armalite developed it for military use first.
Either way, it doesn't really matter.
Yet another lie. The .222 came first and was a varmint round then the .222 mag. then the .223 which is still basically the same round. I've already proven this to you before. To keep the lie going is foolish in front of facts. Armalite did not develop the AR15, it was an already existing gas operated system that had been in use for years. Armalite did cosmetic changes like a carry handle and paint it black but all the rest of the gun already was existing technology.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#413
Jan 29, 2013
 
Tray wrote:
<quoted text> Well well well. Caught with your drawers down again. You changed from "assault weapon" to "assault rifle". Assault rifle is a military term and requires the gun to be FULL AUTO which the AR15 is not. SCOTUS does not have to give me permission it is a right which they can't rule on because the Constitution tells them they can't. In case you have not noticed SCOTUS has dodged that question for 200 years and still does today. They have refused to hear hundreds of cases on the right to keep and bear because they can't hear them legally. By the way I own several now because I have the right to and as bad as you wish you could do something about it you can't because you DON'T have the right to.
The SCOTUS can hear whatever cases they decide to hear.

I don't care what you call them, if they meet the definition set out by the states where their sale is banned, then they're banned.

You have the ABILITY to own them; for now.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#414
Jan 29, 2013
 
Tray wrote:
<quoted text> Yet another lie. The .222 came first and was a varmint round then the .222 mag. then the .223 which is still basically the same round. I've already proven this to you before. To keep the lie going is foolish in front of facts. Armalite did not develop the AR15, it was an already existing gas operated system that had been in use for years. Armalite did cosmetic changes like a carry handle and paint it black but all the rest of the gun already was existing technology.
Who cares?

If it meets the definition of an assault weapon in those 7 states, then their sale is banned.
Tray

New Albany, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#415
Jan 29, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually the NRA avoided taking any of those bans to the SCOTUS for decades because they were afraid they didn't have the votes to get the ruling they wanted.
The laws are in place. If YOU want them oveturned, then it's up to YOU to take them to the SCOTUS.
Better hurry though, before President Obama gets a chance to name yet another liberal to the court.....
Opps screwed up again. Scotus refuses these cases because the second amendment is self evident and they don't have the power to rule against the constitution. Even another liberal can't change the constitution regardless of how much they want to. Rarely will SCOTUS revisit an opinion by a previous SCOTUS court. Do you think if SCOTUS made an opinion today that slavery was legal and white men had a right to own blacks it would change the facts of reality? The second amendment is in place to prevent such a thing from happening. One man or even five men making an opinion never changes a right. Slaves were owned and refused rights but that does not negate the fact the rights existed, just that they were denied.
Tray

New Albany, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#416
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Who cares?
If it meets the definition of an assault weapon in those 7 states, then their sale is banned.
Yet again you lie. NO GOVERNMENT entity that has AR15's in their possession or use lists them as assault weapons, that includes those seven states. NO COMPANY that produces and sells guns lists an assault weapon in their catalog or inventory or production list. It is only a term used by anti self defense nuts like you.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#417
Jan 29, 2013
 
Tray wrote:
<quoted text> Opps screwed up again. Scotus refuses these cases because the second amendment is self evident and they don't have the power to rule against the constitution. Even another liberal can't change the constitution regardless of how much they want to. Rarely will SCOTUS revisit an opinion by a previous SCOTUS court. Do you think if SCOTUS made an opinion today that slavery was legal and white men had a right to own blacks it would change the facts of reality? The second amendment is in place to prevent such a thing from happening. One man or even five men making an opinion never changes a right. Slaves were owned and refused rights but that does not negate the fact the rights existed, just that they were denied.
If the 2nd amendment was "self evident" then there wouldn't have been 4 justices voting to uphold D.C. & Chicago's ban on handguns.

Since: Nov 09

Newnan, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#418
Jan 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

TonyT1961 wrote:
<quoted text>
Man are you stupid Dumbo!
Assault weapons means assault weapons dingleberry - not handguns!
Most in the United States favor a universal background check - including gun shows currently exempt;
http://www.guns.com/2012/12/28/gallup-poll-am...
"WASHINGTON, Jan 17 (Reuters)- About three-quarters of Americans surveyed support proposals to ban the sale of automatic weapons, ban high-capacity ammunition clips and expand background checks on all gun buyers, according to an online Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Thursday."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/17/gun-...
Rasmussen poll shows the following Dumbo, or Au Contraire, or whoever you feel like being today;
"55% Favor Assault Weapons Ban, But 62% Oppose Complete Gun Ban"
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_conten...
Come back with proof you idiot.
Can you tell me what state exempts background checks at gun shows????

Three quarters of Americans "surveyed"...just how many and who were in that survey??? I know 50 gun owners and none of them support an AR ban....so 100 % of that survey shows that people oppose a ban. Fully automatic weapons have been restricted to those who have a class III license. That involves a background check that takes months and also a sign off by the cheif law enforcement officer of the county...You obviously know nothing about guns or gun laws. You are just another left wing dirtbag from long island. I'm sure you are a big fan of carloine mccarthy

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 381 - 400 of529
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••