What Feinstein's Bill Left Out
Results 1 to 4 of 4
Like Tree5Likes
  • 5 Post By mmckee1952

What Feinstein's Bill Left Out

This is a discussion on What Feinstein's Bill Left Out within the Firearm Politics & 2nd Amendment Issues forums, part of the Main Category category; By: Alan Korwin [Composite summary: Sen. Diane Feinstein, a long-time crusader for justice and peace, motivated by unspeakable tragedy, has ...

  1. #1
    mmckee1952 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    2,388

    Default What Feinstein's Bill Left Out

    By: Alan Korwin

    [Composite summary: Sen. Diane Feinstein, a long-time crusader for justice and peace, motivated by unspeakable tragedy, has introduced her wonderful brand new bill designed to make children safe and take those awful killing machines off the street to stop crime and make everyone safer. The powerful gun lobby will fight her because they are evil.]

    [NY Times version:] WASHINGTON — by Jennifer Steinhauer -- During a lengthy and at times emotionally wrenching news conference, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California on Thursday announced legislation that would ban the sale and manufacture of 157 types of semiautomatic weapons, as well as magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition...
    Surrounded by victims of gun violence, colleagues in the Senate and House and several law enforcement officials, and standing near pegboards with several large guns attached, Ms. Feinstein acknowledged the difficulty in pursuing such legislation, even when harnessing the shock and grief over the shooting of 20 schoolchildren in Newtown, Conn., last month. “This is really an uphill road,” Ms. Feinstein said...]

    I've just finished reading the 122 pages of Diane Feinstein's latest "gun-control" bill, Senate Bill S.150, and was surprised to find some important things missing.
    Even more surprising was one small item briefly mentioned on page 13 that has not been reported in any "news" coverage I have seen. It's a whopper -- it invalidates her entire list of guns, and I've written ten books on this topic, I know what I'm saying! -- but first, here's what's missing:

    1. Criminals.
    Nothing addresses criminals -- everything is aimed at innocent people who haven't done anything wrong. There is not even any "malum in se" (legalese for intent to do wrong) or criminal intention. It is all "malum prohibitum" (wrong because we say so), the worst kind of bureaucratic and government abuse -- crime by decree. The critics appear to be right. This is not about gun control, it is purely about control. The bill simply removes the right to own property Americans currently own.

    (That's not completely accurate about criminals; there is one small requirement for anyone carrying a "grandfathered semi-auto 'assault' weapon" or having one in 'such close proximity' to yourself that you could retrieve it and use it as if you carried it, if a "prohibited possessor" came near, so that the prohibited individual has no ability to access the weapon, or else keep it protected with 'a secure gun storage or safety device'. Yes, it's complicated. It seems to mean you can machine gun (or otherwise shoot) criminals without being charged with having a gun near bad people. And of course, prohibited possessors are prohibited.) Licensed importers, manufacturers and dealers are exempt.

    2. Crazy people.
    Please forgive my use of common English -- nothing addresses people who are nuts, borderline nuts, formerly nuts or no longer nuts and still perpetually banned from their rights. The entire problem of psychology -- screamed about in the media and by politicians -- is nowhere to be found in Feinstein's bill, despite claims and mountains of evidence that this is a root cause of the problem.
    Former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, whose husband Mark Kelly testified before Congress today (Wed. Jan. 30, 2013) that she owns a gun, would not be hampered by Feinstein's bill in any way, even though she is severely brain damaged due to a criminal assault.

    3. Drugs issued by Big Pharma.
    Despite labels that warn psychotropic drugs may cause psychotic episodes, suicidal tendencies, manic behavior, sudden death and various social and psychological disturbances, this is unaddressed in the democrat's proposed solution to mass murder by people hopped up on psychologically prescribed medications. Reports indicate that virtually all the mass murders were "deaths under the influence" (DUI) it is missing in the bill, an omission of Feinsteinian proportions. (The Citizens Commission on Human Rights International has a researched list of perps and their drugs here: Columbine)

    4. Make-believe gun-free zones.
    Overwhelming evidence repeatedly and clearly demonstrates that the massacres driving the frenzy toward civil-rights infringement occur in these make-believe gun-free zones, yet no inkling of an effort to reduce or mitigate this problem is addressed in Mrs. Feinstein's proposed hardware solution. "If we don't address the problem, how can we hope for a solution," one expert democrat asked, who requested anonymity to avoid retribution from her fellow party members.

    5. Revolvers.
    Mrs. Feinstein appears to have completely overlooked normal capacity, fast-shooting revolvers, that can release a powerful volley of dangerous hollowpoint cop-killer bullets. We don't want her to expand her list of course, but her plan is deliberately "allowing" criminals to murder people everywhere using her approved list of guns -- the ones she hasn't banned yet. The ones, like six-guns, cowboys used in every bloody Western you've ever watched. Why would she do such a reckless thing? She could not be reached for comment before press time.
    For that matter, why is Mrs. Feinstein and her supporters in the press and elsewhere so intent on arming everyone with ten-shooters (the bill calls for a free market in sales of ten-round magazines)? Why isn't anyone questioning that? That makes no sense at all. If the goal is to protect innocent defenseless little doe-eyed children, which everyone agrees is a really good idea, forcing psychopaths to use ten-shooters is a really bad idea. Steps should be taken to disarm criminals completely. Fortunately, current law covers that completely. This bill does absolutely nothing in that regard.

    6. Gun safety.
    Nothing in her 122-page bill deals with gun safety. No training, no marksmanship, nothing for teachers, no self-defense awareness, no public education, nothing for schools, everything the president has asked for to increase child safety is missing in her long list of guns she would remove from the hands of the innocent. Even the slightest measure of increased gun safety is missing in her plans. Maybe it's just an oversight and will come in floor negotiations and the inevitable amendments. The chilling suggestion that her bill is just cover so that less extreme bills will seem moderate could not be confirmed as we went to press.

    7. Constitutional validity.
    Every aspect of this bill appears to be an infringement on the Bill Of Rights, with no legitimate justification. Congress cannot pass infringements by majority vote. That is forbidden, although the word "infringement" itself is universally missing in "news" reports, in case you haven't noticed.
    Congress can't just enact whatever they want by majority rule. If they could, we would not have government of limited delegated powers, the hallmark of freedom and The American Way. It must just be a typo, on page two, continuing for 121 pages. If it's not a typo, it is grounds for removal from office for violation of her oath of office. Boy, would that be an embarrassment.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Louisville Ky.
    Posts
    1,043

    Default

    Since she names firearms to be banned but includes the words "but not limited to" couldn't her proposed ban also ban ALL handguns since all handguns have a "pistol grip".

  3. #3
    UATKP is offline Uncle Al
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    861

    Default

    Must I remind you that any law that is not in accordance with the Constitution of the United States is no law at all?
    OK. This is a reminder: Any law that is not in accordance with the Constitution of the United States is no law at all.
    Stop, Drop, and Roll won't work in Hell.
    The truth about the former Republic of the United States of America:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6Ioz...ayer_embedded#

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    3,089

    Default

    It bears repeating that arguments made during Heller about decades of laws clearly infringing the second amendment are on the books... was responded with... just because federal, state governments and other municipalities have grown accustomed to violating the rights of its citizens... does not make it constitutional...

    So basically what they are saying is until someone with a fat enough wallet to get it in front of scotus comes forward, or armed insurrection...they can do anything they want.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •