Posted on 03/27/2009 9:36:25 PM PDT by neverdem
In 1994, Sen. Dianne Feinstein used the tragedy of San Francisco's 101 California massacre to push a decadelong ban on assault weapons through Congress. But even the horror of Saturday's slayings of four Oakland police officers is unlikely to break through the bipartisan opposition that blocked the renewal of that ban in 2004.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and dozens of House Democrats have said they oppose efforts to bring back the national ban, either because the timing is wrong or because they oppose gun control.
Pelosi said she hasn't even discussed the possibility of a renewal with President Obama and his staff, who face urgent issues from fixes to the nation's economy to health care reform.
"Let's start out enforcing the laws we have now," she said at a Feb. 26 news conference, echoing the argument of the National Rifle Association and other pro-gun activists.
But the political roadblocks aren't going to stop Feinstein.
With the pain of Oakland's fatal shootings still fresh, Feinstein declined to comment directly on plans to renew her long-running quest for a new ban on the sale of assault weapons. But Gil Duran, a spokesman for the senator, said Feinstein is preparing a new bill...
--snip--
Democrats aren't any more eager to buck the gun lobby this year. Reid voted against the assault weapons ban in 1994, against the renewal in 2004 and let it be known he would oppose it again this year if it came up for a Senate vote.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Commie ‘RATS exploiting fallen heroes again by using them to achieve THEIR political objectives. Pathetic.
“But even the horror of Saturday’s slayings of four Oakland police officers is unlikely to break through the bipartisan opposition that blocked the renewal of that ban in 2004.”
Maybe people figured out that the perp was already forbidden to have any sort of weapon, being on parole, and yet managed to murder four people in cold blood. Therefore, the notion that he’d obey an assault weapons ban is pretty far-fetched.
How about introducing a ban on worthless thugs?
Look at it scientifically. The probability that any given black male will be involved in a crime of violence is ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE higher than the probability that any given “assault weapon” or firearm in general, will be used in a crime. So, do we REALLY need to control guns? Or minorities? You decide. By the way, you won’t read this in the Media Monolith.
So, the democrats are proving Wayne LaPierre correct when he said that they need as nuch killings as they can get to get their gun laws passed.
By the way, the Full Auto Ban Amendment to the 1986 “Firearms Owners Protection Act” never REALLY passed! It was just on a voice vote, and the Nays WAY outweighed the Yeas on the Amendment’s adoption ballot! I heard it! Tip O’Neal just PROCLAIMED that it passed, to the GASPS of many in attendence, and the minority Repubs could not challenge him because of the parlimentary rules in effect at the time! HONEST! History!
I would really like to know how an AWB would stand up to scrutiny under Heller?
Just offhand, it seems that the Supremes specifically allowed semi-auto pistols. Would that carry over into semi-auto rifles as well?
I sure hope so, but I am not a pro in this area.
I think we really need to control criminal activity. I don’t think there is a genetic link to it.
There is a black culture that is in almost total decay right now. The welfare state and rabbit like promiscuity are the two horns of the devil. The family gets destroyed (aha! the traditional family is proven once again to be the backbone of any society) and we have criminal anarchy, with a few decent scared souls stuck in there.
How would a ban on sale of any personal, hand-carried firearm have affected the killer of the four policemen? It seems to me that contempt for laws is integral to his character and world view.
Because the Heller decision recognized that the "right to keep and bear arms" pre-existed the Constitution and includes the right to self-defense, it was not necessary to discuss in great detail the "Militia clause".
Though many have claimed that the Miller decision supports the so-called "collective right" to keep and bear arms, the actual decision of the Miller Court did not include any suggestion that Miller or his co-defendant had to be members of a Militia. It was only suggested that the Court lacked any evidence that a short-barreled shotgun, itself, could be useful to a Militia; the implication being that the defendants would be protected in that case from conviction.
The COMBINATION of Miller and Heller would then result in a protection of commonly-owned arms useful to a Militia possessed by anyone whose prohibition is not otherwise justified. Such an interpretation would protect the possession of full-auto M-16s, which are the equivalent of the rifle carried by practically every U.S. soldier. The lack of commonality of such arms is a direct result of the enforcement of infringing laws and should not sway the Court.
The AWB doesn't even concern itself with full-auto rifles. Only some semi-automatic rifles are covered under such laws.
The Court should find it extremely strange to be asked to uphold a law which bans commonly-owned semi-automatic rifles simply because they are equipped with such non-lethal features as a bayonet lug or a flash-suppressor or a pistol grip. One might reasonably ask whether the Court would laugh at a law which would put a one-armed shooter at a distinct disadvantage in operating a rifle by permitting a prohibition on a feature which the anti-gunners have assured us permits a person to fire using only one arm.
If the Supreme Court ever accepts an Assault-Weapons-Ban case, the five who decided Heller will throw out the law and will include much language of derision directed at the minority who attempts to justify it.
The next AWB will probably not focus on the aesthetic details as much such as flash suppressors or pistol grips and instead go right to the main distinction of being semi-automatic and/or capable of a larger type magazine. Since this should include about 100 million plus guns out there in this country I would think that it not only will be impractical to enforce but also fall under the “commonly used” category of types of guns described in Heller.
The original AWB only passed through Congress because is was so vague in describing an AWB that you could have the exact same gun with only very minor differences, as well as the fact that it did have a sunset clause in it. Otherwise it wouldn’t have passed, and this, along with bipartisan resistance would put the present AWB possibility as a much taller order to get through into law than we had before.
How sad to see politicians assign blame (assualt) to a cold piece of steel in an attempt to further their careers.
I fell off a ladder once, was it an assault ladder? An old lady backed into my parked truck putting a big dent in the driver's door, was it an assault Buick?
The insanity that passes for reason by the collectivists knows no end. As a free people we have to make it stop before we're un-free.
The typical collectivist like Feinstein is a brain-dead tool (useful idiot) in the toolbox used by c*cks*cking communists to destroy what is at the heart of this country's success: individual liberty.
The battle between the State and the Individual has taken on new proportions as we deal with the economic calamity that now surrounds us. Note how the socialist, self-serving 'government' will spend huge sums on 'public' investments to provide 'stimulus', rather than reduce taxes or remove barriers that would signal to the private sector a time to invest, take risks again, and get businesses building again, one at a time.
Free markets are despised by the c*cks*cking communist as they are inherently ill-prepared to compete within them. They lack too much in the way of entrepreneurialism to ever succeed. But, they make up for it with their abundace of dictatorial-ism.(there's that dic again)
America isn't that much different than much of the world unless you weigh individual freedoms. But, they're getting much lighter. Relieve Americans of their guns and they'll be no different from other countries that have allowed c-sucking communists to control their institutions.
Useful idiot collectivists like Feinstein know not who they serve. They really are that stupid. However, stupidity is not a defense, and when Americans finally awaken to the steady erosion of their liberties and freedoms, these 'idiots' should be made to pay and pay dearly.
I predict this will come sometime soon with the election of King Kenyan to the White House. As the collectivist's crank the bench vise tighter on the American spirit, something's gonna give. President Piker and his Chicago Goonies are just the one's to break things. Come to think of it, they might just be the ones we've been waiting for//.
That Americans are gunning-up is a good thing- not because they're being told to do so by a 'collective', but because it's pure individualism at work. Let's hope the markets will be allowed to 'keep up' with demand.
good rant Sir, I would only argue that the commie bastards are not stupid, but simply Evil, and that is slightly more dangerous...
Dianne Feinstein?
The politicians are concerned about their own welfare.
These incidents are used to gin up public support for banning firearms.
But their main concern is their own safety.
YES. Intact families ARE the building block of civilization.
LOL! Good observations! Have a great day!
I stand to be corrected, but the original AWB back in 1994 was an amendment to a “crime prevention” bill that most everyone was in support of on both sides of the aisle...
If a new and improved AWB is to be introduced, we need to make sure it stands on its own thru the process...That way nothing can get in the way of a clear vote on it...Up or down...
That way we know who to crucify, and who to be pardoned, for just being guilty of being around that filth...;-)
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.