Posted on 10/09/2017 8:25:31 AM PDT by Liberty7732
Anti-Second Amendment crusader Senator Dianne Feinstein admitted on a Sunday spin show that no law could have stopped the maniac who massacred 58 people and injured almost 500 in Las Vegas last week.
“No, he passed background checks registering for handguns and other weapons on multiple occasions,” Feinstein told CBS’s “Face the Nation.”
But there is one law he definitely broke, which is the law against murder. Criminals don't follow the law. Nevertheless, she persisted.
“Regulations aren’t going to do it,” Feinstein said on the need for a law over an ATF rule. “We need a law. It can’t be changed by another president.”
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
The Democrats are glad he passed all checks.
Now they can get to what they are always after. Outright bans. Let the masks come off.
Doesn’t look like that’s what she said. She DOES think a law would solve the problem (total ban, of course, being implied).
Oh. You mean like Chicago?
DiFi carries. I occasionally fantasize as to exactly where.
“Gun Nanny DiFi: No Law Would Have Stopped Vegas Gunman”
But let’s pass one anyhow.
***The Democrats are glad he passed all checks.***
Remember when California released Pat Purdy from an insane asylum and allowed him to buy guns, even passing California’s handgun waiting periods?
He then shot up the Stockton schoolyard. the politicians immediately pulled out an anti-gun act they had shelved and passed it before any opposition could be mounted.
To Leftists, the solution to failed Leftism is more Leftism.
So, is just she just an idjit, or did she inadvertently reveal that the ATF is blatantly violating US law?
Is there really a "registering for handguns and other weapons" in Nevada or wherever the nutjob's residence of record was? Is the Federal government actually scanning in all those Forms 4473 into a massive database, in direct violation of both the letter and spirit of the law?
no matter how much personal protection the ruling elite have surrounding them to supposedly keep them safe from the citizens, they still feel vulnerable because the citizens still have firearms. That is what our Founders had in mind per the second amendment. Then there is this old saying; “if you don’t use it, you lose it.”
It would be unfair to not release the insane from an asylum.
We can’t have that.
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.