Skip to comments.
Assault weapons ban back in play; Feinstein tries to get reluctant Congress ...
San Francisco Chronicle ^
| Feb 9, 2004
| by Edward Epstein
Posted on 02/09/2004 9:03:09 AM PST by Lazamataz
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:45:44 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
Washington -- Gun control hasn't emerged as a leading issue in the 2004 presidential race, but that is likely to change as Democratic California Sen. Dianne Feinstein intensifies her effort to win renewal of the decade-old assault weapons ban, which expires in September.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: bang; banglist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 661-672 next last
To: Lazamataz
Same here, GW sings any legislation restricting gun rights and he's a carbon copy of daddy, it's gonna cost him enough votes to swing the balance. And he and his advisors are blind to think it wont cost him the election.
To: Spok
His base is firm. The only fading is from fringe one-issue types holed up in their basements dreading the world who probably didn't support him to begin with. Those who are so foolish as to consider cutting off their noses to spit their faces rarely make a difference in anything.
22
posted on
02/09/2004 9:36:17 AM PST
by
justshutupandtakeit
(America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree: Bush must be destroyed.)
To: Lazamataz
And after it makes it to his desk, next to the sombrero and non-alcoholic Corona from Vicente...
However, President Bush has said he will sign a renewal, if it makes it to his desk.
23
posted on
02/09/2004 9:37:00 AM PST
by
StoneColdGOP
(McClintock - In Your Heart, You Know He's Right)
To: donozark
What I liked about the NRA was back in the last two elections, they told their members to get off their *$$eS and work for their candidates because they would be the ones in office to work for the sunset.
The work started over two years ago. Not a week before it was supposed to come to a vote.
24
posted on
02/09/2004 9:38:38 AM PST
by
Shooter 2.5
(Don't punch holes in the lifeboat)
To: Lazamataz
Well, gotta disagree with your contention but thanks for posting article. Roy Blunt and Tom Delay will stop it in the House. Remember, the Republican controlled House voted to repeal the AW Ban in 1996 239-173 vote. If anything, they understand more than ever, the power gun owners have. If not? They will be checking the "Help Wanted" ads...
25
posted on
02/09/2004 9:40:12 AM PST
by
donozark
To: jimtorr
ping and ditto
what is the point of electing conservatives that turn around and act like Labour party flacks. and embrace the left like a long lost child.
'mp' you will perish at the gibbet or of the pox
'pm' that depends on whether I embrace your policies or your mistress.
r
26
posted on
02/09/2004 9:41:03 AM PST
by
woerm
(student of history)
To: Lazamataz
I am here to tell you that it will absolutely make it to his desk.
100% guaranteed.
One of the only times I would disagree with you Laz.
Though there are times I too feel pessimistic about the "Sunset" of the Ban, I trust Delay ( and I think the President does also ) that renewal stands NO chance in the House.
27
posted on
02/09/2004 9:41:49 AM PST
by
CaptSkip
To: justshutupandtakeit
one-issue typesYes, adherence to the Constitution (in other words, upholding your oath) is my one issue.
28
posted on
02/09/2004 9:44:12 AM PST
by
Sir Gawain
(Republicans give spineless cowards a bad name)
To: Sir Gawain
So a dubious claim of not witholding a part of the Constitution would justify your helping outright and declared enemies of it into power?
Remind me not to expect help from you on any important issue.
29
posted on
02/09/2004 10:02:10 AM PST
by
justshutupandtakeit
(America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree: Bush must be destroyed.)
To: Lazamataz
"I find it a dismaying part of public life that guns can be given a protection against lawsuits that no other industry has," Feinstein said. The implication here is that she thinks the purpose of a gun should be to "not cause injury?" This statement is absurd and a great example of why Sen. Feinstein is not fit to serve. If I'm not mistaken, there is nothing in the proposed law that states: if a gun has a manufacturer's defect and an injury occurs due to that defect, that company is NOT liable. I wonder if she needs help tying her shoes.
To: Lazamataz
As long as I get to decide upon the size of the "beer."
31
posted on
02/09/2004 10:03:35 AM PST
by
justshutupandtakeit
(America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree: Bush must be destroyed.)
To: EQAndyBuzz
"The bill will not get to his desk this election cycle."
It is to sunset in September, so one of two things will happen before the elections;
It will sunset (hopefully).
It will go to his desk.
32
posted on
02/09/2004 10:07:50 AM PST
by
looscnnn
(Tell me something, it's still "We the people", right? -- Megadeth (Peace Sells))
To: justshutupandtakeit
As long as I get to decide upon the size of the "beer."Sure, no problem.
This is what I have in mind for my assault rifle:
Please try to stay below 20 megaton yield. Anything larger is a little unwieldy.
33
posted on
02/09/2004 10:08:21 AM PST
by
Lazamataz
(I know exactly what opinion I am permitted to have, and I am zealous -- nay, vociferous -- in it!!!)
To: Lazamataz
"Al Gore's pro-gun- control positions may have cost him the electoral votes of West Virginia and New Hampshire in 2000 -- along with the presidency."
May have cost him two states? Espstein, YOU sir are a DOPE.
Gorebot's pro gun-grabbing stance cost him HIS OWN STATE, and Ark, and the whole south.
And one thing Mr. Rove better remember, the NRA played a HUGE part in getting Dubya elected.
Oh cr@p, excuse me now I have to puke, FNC just should Gorebot's rant from yesterday... gotta run.. BBL
34
posted on
02/09/2004 10:08:56 AM PST
by
Condor51
("Leftists are moral and intellectual parasites" -- Standing Wolf)
To: justshutupandtakeit
You, sir are wrong! The president has has been very good for the country after the attack.I support his moves in Afganistan and Iraq, but some of his other moves have been very democratic in scope. I hope he is just trying to remove many of the rats negatives in the upcoming election, but I feel that he also has lost the intent of the constitution and the scope of government. Those of us that feel that the 2nd ammendment is of supreme importance to the continued existance of this nation have become one issue voters. If President Bush signs a continuation of AWB or a new and more extensive version of AWB, I and so many others will not only not vote for him, but as I have said before, will campaign for the rat. It is my intension that if there is to be a second revolution it will have to be now, before I am too old to pull a trigger or can't remember why I'm pulling it.
35
posted on
02/09/2004 10:09:21 AM PST
by
Big Mack
(I didn't claw my way to the top of the food chain TO EAT VEGETABLES!)
To: Lazamataz
Litmus test.
36
posted on
02/09/2004 10:09:48 AM PST
by
freeeee
("Owning" property in the US just means you have one less landlord)
To: Jim Cane
Stroke of the pen, lose the election. "Kinda cool." Good thought, but how about: "Stroke of the pen, loss of the land."
37
posted on
02/09/2004 10:11:02 AM PST
by
Grut
To: Lazamataz
You're wrong.
DeLay will not let it be voted on. Not even close.
38
posted on
02/09/2004 10:11:32 AM PST
by
sinkspur
(Adopt a shelter dog or cat! You'll save one life, and maybe two!)
To: justshutupandtakeit
"The only fading is from fringe one-issue types holed up in their basements dreading the world who probably didn't support him to begin with."
No, if he were to sign the extension it would be the straw that broke the camels back. The people at are on the fence about him are there due to more than one issue. Wake up, these people are not what you claim they are.
39
posted on
02/09/2004 10:11:54 AM PST
by
looscnnn
(Tell me something, it's still "We the people", right? -- Megadeth (Peace Sells))
To: Mr. Mojo
am here to tell you that it will absolutely make it to his desk. 100% guarenteed.
Yep. It'll be attached to some "must sign" bill. .....and the Prez will sign it, just as he said he'd do.
.....Zero vetos and (not) counting.....
bump!
40
posted on
02/09/2004 10:14:12 AM PST
by
KantianBurke
(Principles, not blind loyalty)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 661-672 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson