Skip to comments.
Feinstein and Schumer Welcome President Bush's Support of Assault Weapons Ban
senate.gov ^
| April 16, 2003
| Democrats Feinstein and Schumer
Posted on 04/19/2003 7:02:08 AM PDT by TLBSHOW
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 361-369 next last
To: annyokie
I live in a house as old as the Republic. It was well made. It will be here long after the yuppie macmansions that surround us have crumbled.
It can be upgraded, renovated, etc, but if I were to tamper with the foundation, it could fall down.
Same as our republic. The Constitution is our foundation.
To: TLBSHOW
Stirring up trouble again I see, Todd.
For the millionth time this will be fought in the House, where the 2nd Amendment actually matters the most, local congressional elctions.
In 99 Schumer and Feinstein passed thru a gun control after Columbine, the House passed a different bill with the help of 45 rural democrats and the Feinstein/Schumer bill died in conference.
The President can fend off demo and media attacks that he is a hostage to the gun lobby in an election year and Congressmen can say they protected the 2nd amendment in the 2004 election.
I know, I know, people will bring up CFR, but CFR is totally different, CFR was a feel good issue that actually blew up in the demo's faces since it turned off their tap of soft money and the latest reports have the Pubbies having a 4 to 1 advantage in fund raising and, IMHO, the most vile part of CFR(ad bans) will be thrown out before the 2004 elections.
You can go on with your chest thumping and simplistic rants Todd.
22
posted on
04/19/2003 8:00:26 AM PDT
by
Dane
To: TLBSHOW
To: TLBSHOW
Who said don't vote for Bush instead what must be done is convince the President to reverse his stand on this issue and do not advance the liberal democrats and Bill Clintons agenda....... And if he is not convinced.......?
To: TLBSHOW
One term President.
To: annyokie
"And no, I don't subscribe to that "living document" nonsense. But is a static interpretation of all after more than 200 years reasonable? I am torn."You betcha, Annie. What good are rules if they change every quarter or inning? The Constitution must not change just because our society has become increasingly lazy, stupid, and perverse. The principles of liberty never go out of date, regardless of how technology causes our society to evolve.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
26
posted on
04/19/2003 8:04:12 AM PDT
by
wku man
To: Dane
Here is the deal..........
The President said he 2000 he would support the ban. The time to stop it is before he signs a ban.
27
posted on
04/19/2003 8:04:13 AM PDT
by
TLBSHOW
(The gift is to see the truth.....)
To: weaponeer
And if he is not convinced.......?
the job of FReepers is to convince him.
28
posted on
04/19/2003 8:06:41 AM PDT
by
TLBSHOW
(The gift is to see the truth.....)
To: TLBSHOW
The President said he 2000 he would support the ban. The time to stop it is before he signs a ban. Yep and the place to do that is in the House, where the 2nd amendment actually can sway a congressional election.
29
posted on
04/19/2003 8:08:14 AM PDT
by
Dane
To: weaponeer
And if he is not convinced.......? No body here wants to vote in a liberal to office. If Bush signs this, he sure as hell isn't a "conservative". If our Rights will not be respected by either liberals or conservatives... then we no longer have the bragging right to he moniker "Free'est country in the world".
From that point... soap box... ballot box... cartridge box.
30
posted on
04/19/2003 8:09:19 AM PDT
by
Dead Corpse
(For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
To: Dane
So what are the freep plans of action on this matter?
31
posted on
04/19/2003 8:10:20 AM PDT
by
TLBSHOW
(The gift is to see the truth.....)
To: weaponeer
One term President IOW, a statement made by a one issue malcontennt who refuses to look through the legislative machinations, but thinks he/she is so cool being a malcontent keyboard commando.
32
posted on
04/19/2003 8:11:05 AM PDT
by
Dane
To: wku man
Thank you for your input. I do appreciate it.
I guess my dilemma is that we are a much different society than when the Founders wrote the Constitution, for which I have terrific respect. They were truly visionary.
As for the rules changing, what about the Instant Replay before making a call in football? Why is there sudden death in pro-football, but not in college games? Again, I am not being a wise-guy.
33
posted on
04/19/2003 8:12:25 AM PDT
by
annyokie
(provacative yet educational reading alert)
To: TLBSHOW
Feinstein and Schumer Welcome President Bush's Support of Assault Weapons Ban Say, Mr. President, you're in great company there. /sarcasm
To: TLBSHOW
So what are the freep plans of action on this matter? Not official freep plans, but my advice is to phone and write a snail mail letter to your congressman. Also if you have a demo congresmman, don't think the matter as a lost cause, especially if you are in a red state.
35
posted on
04/19/2003 8:15:43 AM PDT
by
Dane
To: annyokie
"Is it the preceived incrimentalism toward complete gun control that has people here upset? I'm not trying to be a wiseguy or ignorant, I am just puzzled."
Yes.
36
posted on
04/19/2003 8:16:12 AM PDT
by
bruoz
To: annyokie
Would you agree to the government telling you that you could not purchase a four bedroom home, because you only have two children, and therefore don't "need" four bedrooms? Would you agree to the government telling you that you do not "need" a SUV, or "need" to get your ears pierced, or (you fill in the blank)?
Are you too inept to make your own decisions? Need some government nanny to make your decisions? Why cannot law-abiding citizens own what they want? Others seem quite willing to impose on me. BTW, I am a USMC veteran, 1974-1981. Pay my taxes, sent my son to college, now someone tells me I cannot own something I want (did not say need)?
If guns kill, then mine are all defective. The Second Amendment is not about duck or deer hunting. It is about FREEDOM.
To: weaponeer
Please explain to me you would accept the Kyoto Treaty, the International Criminal Court, higher taxes, UN control of our foreign policy, partial birth abortion, and a liberal Supreme Court for the next two decades for the right to carry a rapid-fire assault rifle.
Thanks.
To: Dane
OK.
Re-signs the AWB.
Can't get a decent tax cut through without doubling the size of government
anti-USA PATRIOT Act and it's more evil twin in part II. Neither of which have sunset clauses.
Farm Bill.
Border Policy.
Before the war talk went into high gear, there was Bush's stance on welfare benefits for illegal aliens.
Are you SURE Bush is a real "conservative"? The only thing right he has done so far is telling the UN to take a hike and going after Saddam.
39
posted on
04/19/2003 8:20:14 AM PDT
by
Dead Corpse
(For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
To: annyokie
"I guess my dilemma is that we are a much different society than when the Founders wrote the Constitution, for which I have terrific respect. They were truly visionary.They just never imagined that technology would allow the governmemt to have more advanced weapons than the people.
40
posted on
04/19/2003 8:20:21 AM PDT
by
two23
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 361-369 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