1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Feinstein's AWB '2013 passed out of Judiciary to be debated/voted in the Senate

Discussion in 'Activism' started by hso, Mar 14, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. sota

    sota Well-Known Member

    we all have our idiot leaders.
    Menendez thinks NJ citizens can get carry permits. Apparently the fool never bothered to read the statues... we're MAY ISSUE... which in practicality means NO ISSUE.

    Personally I'd love to see a 100,000 person protest march on the capital while open carrying in full defiance of that unconstitutional law. I'd have to attend that one.
  2. HighExpert

    HighExpert Well-Known Member

    I really kind of hope that the senate passes it and the house kills it. If the democrats go on record voting for it maybe we will get the same result as we got during the Clinton admin and end up with a Republican senate and house to shut Zero down.
  3. Ryanxia

    Ryanxia Well-Known Member

    It's still important to write them. They need to be reminded that there is still a strong voice out there in opposition of gun control. If everyone just gives up and leaves them alone when they are clearly violating their Constitutional Oath then more and more will do it because there is no one to answer to.
  4. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    For those members that choose to engage in negativism, please review the rules for Activism.
  5. Trent

    Trent Resident Wiseguy

    Not trying to be negative, just wanted to share IL rep Dick Durbin is a no-go. I've tried writing, and e-mail, and phone calls, but keep getting back the same "I'm throwing you under the bus" type of response.

    HSO; any ideas on what we could do to change that attitude? Or is he just a lost cause?
  6. Jeff White

    Jeff White Moderator Staff Member

    You can't change Durbin's attitude. The man hasn't had an original thought in his entire life. He lied to me to my face when he was my congressman during the run up to the 94 AWB and then when I called him on it he had the nerve to tell me I must have not remembered our meeting correctly.

    The only thing we can do is somehow run him out of office.
  7. mljdeckard

    mljdeckard Well-Known Member

    I trust Jeff's memory completely on this one. Of course we all should do our due dilligence here, but at the same time, there are some lawmakers for whom it is a token effort, and they are never changing their minds.
  8. 1SOW

    1SOW Well-Known Member

    NO. "THEY represent "US". Politely reminding them of that along with asking for his/her vote to defeat this weapons ban, is what "WE" need to do.

    "WE" do have a pretty loud voice if "WE" all use it and not stand idly by waiting for an outcome.

    The same thing happened in the election---a low percentage turnout at a critical time.
  9. r1derbike

    r1derbike Well-Known Member

    I would like nothing better than to help vote out Republican or Democrat proponents of these bills. It would be the right thing to do. It will be done.

    I apologized to my wife today, for being obsessed with writing all my representatives in the state and inside the beltway, the last couple of weeks.

    It has taken-away our usual evening quality time, and I do it during the day while she is at work.

    Her answer? Honey, it's what you believe in. I may be without you for a bit, but this crusade needs seen to fruition, if possible. What a trooper!

    I have my suspicions that she's been so tolerant as we're going to the range tomorrow to rent several sidearms, and I'm buying the one she is comfortable with, for her own protection...if and when my LGSs around here have any in stock.
  10. leprechaun50

    leprechaun50 Well-Known Member

    This is what I get when sending to Al Franken's official contact address.

    The page you requested could not be found. Please make sure you have the correct url and try again.

    I have sent e-mails to the same address before and it has worked. I wonder if he has had it shut down as this is his official Minnesota senate e-mail address.
  11. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    We can't. For a hard core Anti they need a personal experience that shatters their world view to change their minds. Short of being personally saved from a terrifying threat of certain death by one of us using the very firearms he'd ban we can't break the mindset.
  12. RPRNY

    RPRNY Well-Known Member

    To those who want this legislation voted on so "we can see where they stand " I would note that NRA - ILNA has done the analysis and can tell you where every member of Congress stands. We do NOT want a vote.

    Killed in Committee, death by procedure, fillibustered out of existence are all better by far than the risk of a vote. Bad hair day, bare quorum, the midnight run are all risks on a floor vote. We get down to five votes and suddenly five districts are getting promises of Multimillion dollar investments and hundreds of jobs created courtesy of Bloomberg Industries if they will just vote "present ", suddenly Air Force bases and Navy installations may have to be shut down in those districts if they oppose the Bill. The junior member from the State of "you ain't taking our guns away " may find that the Justice Dept is deeply interested in investigating new allegations of campaign finance fraud and the Peoria Daily Bugle suddenly has a line on photos of him and his frat brothers engaged in carnal knowledge with Rambo, their college teams goat mascot.

    We want to win. We do not want a vote.


    Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2013
  13. JRH6856

    JRH6856 Well-Known Member

  14. Bobson

    Bobson Well-Known Member

    According to the NRA, every single Senator who voted in favor of the ban was a Democrat, and every single Senator who voted against it was a Republican.

    Some people still argue that this isn't a liberal vs conservative issue, but this seems to disprove that - among our representatives, at least.

    In other words, if you consider yourself to be liberal on many issues, but happen to be a 2A supporter, don't assume your representatives share your beliefs when it comes time to vote them in or out. You'll likely be forced to side with the lesser of two evils - whichever evil you choose to support is up to you.
  15. kwguy

    kwguy Well-Known Member

    I agree with RPRNY. We really do not want a vote. It does NOT DESERVE a vote. It is so obviously against the constitution, that putting it up for a vote is insulting. It deserves to be killed in committee.

    I know that no one here would agree that introducing slavery as a means of economic gain would ever deserve a vote, let alone any type of serious discussion. Why? Because it's so obviously in contravention to our constitution. It's the same for this AWB. Some things do not even deserve to see the light of day. This crap legislation is one of those things.
  16. RPRNY

    RPRNY Well-Known Member

    I think there are a handful of Dems at least in the House that wouldn't have supported Feinstein's Bill and there are a number of Republicans in both House and Senate who cannot be counted on to vote against even an AWB. Let's not forget that Cuomo's "SAFE" Act was rammed through the NYS with OVERWHELMING Bi-Partisan support and that if the Republicans had held firm against, there were enough Dems prepared to vote against it to have stopped it.

    But, I think we have to reframe this "national discussion". First of all, based on population centers and the recent Presidential election, allowing this to continue as a Democrat vs Republican debate is a loss for citizens' RKBA. The issue is a Liberal and Conservative vs an Illiberal one.

    This is good thinking.

    The Democratic leadership are no longer even Liberal. The current debate over 2A rights is not solely about RKBA. There is a much larger issue at stake and the more we point this out to real Liberals, rather than the Neo-Libs that have hijacked the Democratic Party, the less and less comfortable they are going to be with "their" Party, just as many Conservatives have been deeply disappointed by the Republicans.

    We have an Administration and Democratic Leadership that has betrayed its Liberal supporters time and time again. This Administration has the worst record on Freedom of Information Act disclosures since the law was enacted. The Democratic leadership has not only embraced the violation of Civil Liberties in the Patriot Act, it has extended and broadened them in violation of the 4th Amendment. This Administration, with the approval of the Democratic leadership, is responsible for the increasing militarization of law enforcement organizations and a massive growth in their numbers. This Administration has denied US citizens abroad their 5th Amendment rights and illegally executed US citizens without due process. Eric Holder, the Attorney General, even after grudgingly answering Sen. Rand Paul that the President could not deny US citizens in the US their 5th Amendment rights and execute those he deemed "at war" with the US on US soil, continues to assert that the President can do so if he deems them "combatants". Not "if a Grand Jury deems them combatants", not "if they are found guilty by a jury oof their peers". If the President deems them so, they may be executed on US soil without due process. That means that anyone the President deems "at war" with the US. Tomorrow that could mean people who refuse to obey unconstitutional laws. In a future Administration it could mean groups of ethnic minorities who believe they are singled out by LEOs and are assembled to protest their treatment...

    The fight over RKBA is only part of a broader effort by the political elites of both parties (the latest President Bush and his Congressional allies were a party to much of this as well) to increase the power of a Central Government and to diminish both States' rights and individual rights. Mandated Obamacare is very much an issue of enhancing and empowering a Central Government (we call it Federal, but that term lost meaning a long time ago) at the expense of States' rights.

    Real Liberals may be tax and spend crazies and may still believe that Big Government social engineering is good for Americans, but they are also deeply concerned about civil and individual liberties. If we can successfully frame the "national discussion" around the systematic diminution of civil liberties and individual rights, of which the assault on RKBA is just one part, there are many Liberals (not the Neo-Libs who are in fact Etatist Socialists) - and importantly many Liberal jurists and Judges - who will be able to see the issue form the perspective of pro2A activists. The problem is that if this is framed as Republican vs Democrat, we lose because there are many Republicans who have shown themselves no great friends of Civil Liberties and guilty of their own infringements of the Constitution. If we believe that RKBA is protected by the Constitution and that politicians must respect the Constitution, then we have to embrace the entire Constitution. That's going to be a problem for many Conservatives who aren't very comfortable with the separation of Church and State, for example. (Nevertheless, when in doubt, be aware that the vast and overwhelming majority of Dems will vote for stringent gun control in a heartbeat whereas even the most lily-livered Republican can often be scared into voting against it, at least West of the Hudson...)

    In any event, the point is RKBA is a broader Civil Liberty issue and real Liberals should be equallly concerned. If I had the money, my advertising campaign might include things like:

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." First Amendment to the US Constitution (The Bill of Rights)

    "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." Second Amendment to the US Constitution (Bill of Rights)

    Is either of these restrictions on law-makers hard to understand? Dianne Feinstein can't seem to understand the Second. Let's hope she never gets her hands on the First...or the Thirteenth.
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2013
  17. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Please don't get complacent. What happened is Feinstein was told that her AWB (S. 150) will not be part of the "base gun control bill" offered by Dems. This means that the bill that gets a floor vote will not have AWB language in it. However, Feinstein can still offer her bill as an amendment to this bill (or any other gun bill) and if she has the votes (50 or 60 depending on the procedural tactics used) it will become part of whatever bill she tries to attach it to.

    The reason they did this is because the Dem leadership really wants registration and they are afraid that putting the AWB in the base bill will kill all of their gun control - and cause them to lose Senate races in 2014.

    The game here is with the AWB separate, your not-so-Second-Amendment-friendly Senators can tell you in 2014: "I support the Second Amendment and voted against gun and magazine bans; however I continue to support reasonable, common-sense gun laws like (having you stupid hillbillies tell me what guns and magazines you own so that after I'm re-elected I can fix that) universal background checks."
  18. wbrown609

    wbrown609 Active Member

    If I am not mistaken the magazine ban is still in there. They have just dip one away with the "assault weapon" ban in the bill. This is a way to get even more votes for the magazine ban.
  19. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    Reid has killed S150 so this thread doesn't have a basis for continuing.

    We will watch closely what sort of deals are made to introduce it or parts of it into other legislation as amendments that can sneak in unrecognized.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page