The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved a renewed assault-weapons ban, advancing the measure to the Senate floor where it will face intense resistance from Republicans and other gun-rights supporters.
The bill was approved by the committee on a party-line, 10-8 vote. Chief sponsor, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said she knows “the road is uphill” for the legislation, but sought to press her colleagues to consider the bill.
“Are we going to stand with the thousands of police chiefs and law enforcement officers who do support this bill? Are we going to stand with the victims of gun violence?” she said, stressing that the bill does not take “any weapons away from anybody” but would ban future purchases.
Let’s make this as clear as possible: Feinstein did this before. It failed. Under what earthly justification can the Senate Democrats possibly believe it rational to do the same thing yet again?
And the answer is simple: they don’t care about gun violence; they don’t care about criminals; they don’t care really about mental health, save for how they are able to use any of these things as justifications to incrementally disarm American citizens — the last line of defense for citizens against a government bent on transforming us to subjects upon which to socially experiment, be it through a “nudge” or “coercive paternalism.”
The vote comes after the Senate Judiciary Committee advanced bills earlier in the week to enact near-universal background checks and combat gun trafficking. The measure approved Thursday is the most controversial drafted since the deadly Newtown, Conn., school shooting.
But once it reaches the full Senate — probably in April — the measure faces heavy opposition by Republicans and some moderate Democrats, as well. Feinstein acknowledged she’d need more backing if it is to stand a chance on the floor — even then, it’s hard to imagine a circumstance where the Republican-controlled House would allow the measure to proceed.
Hard to imagine for whom? The House GOP leadership has already signaled that it is prepared to caucus with Democrats to “do something” — provided only that the title of the legislation strikes the right chord showing that, in a bi-partisan way, at least some Republicans care. About the children.
And in fact, Eric Cantor is one of those who has expressed a willingness to reach some common-sense compromises on gun control.
So you’ll excuse me if I’m dubious about the idea that it’s hard to imagine Republicans caving. True, the vast majority of the House Republicans won’t cave; but all it takes, as we’ve seen since the GOP leadership has determined the Hastert rule can be replaced in good conscience by the Powell Rule, is a handful of “mavericks” looking for good press to drive the Democrat’s agenda through the GOP-led House.
— Although in this case, I think should anything pass, that might be the spark that ignites the beginnings of civil disobedience — and convinces many states that they need to protect themselves from a federal government whose representatives refuse to recognize the wishes of their state and local constituencies.
the thousands of police chiefs and law enforcement officers who do support this bill
second look at chris dorner anyone
Leading us into yet another refrain of Alice’s Restaurant Massacree in Five-Part Harmony.
Doesn’t anyone in Congress recall the definition of insanity?
Anxious to shoot a cops daughter are you happyfeet?
‘‘Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013’’, so cuddly, so innocent sounding. Who could oppose fixing the oh so broken “Gun Check” system?
A bill written with so much care to exempt, from any problem, your kids, your wife, your friends. Can’t you see the kindness flowing from every phrase. The perfectly chosen, diabolically chosen words that will make felons of almost anyone who owns a gun even if they just keep it always locked in a safe.
What a perfect exposition of the progressive way of law.
So, my own Senator just voted to outlaw, among other things, my .22LR rifle. Genius.
The right honorable Seldom Righthouse, Pablo. I do not miss him.
Feinstein vs Cruz.
The only thing more ironic than this woman getting her career boosted by a nut with a gun is that she, Moscone and Milk all supported Jim Jones’ Peoples Temple who were quite fond of guns and using them on people.
Nice judgment there Di.
Obama: “I am not a dictator.”
Biden: “I’m no dummy.”
DiFi: “I am not a sixth-grader.”
Magritte: “Ceci n’est pas une pipe.”
It seems that the Democrat position is that as long as one person is allowed to have a flintlock musket then “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” hasn’t been infringed.
Bill Gates: “But he should be.”
I’m not sure how much more of this I can take.
The two newspaper delivery women who were shot at during the manhunt for Christopher Dorner will not be getting a new replacement truck as promised by the LAPD, according to their attorney Glen Jonas.
It has been more than a month since LAPD Chief Charlie Beck promised the truck to Emma Hernandez, 71, and her daughter, Margie Carranza, who had been working in Torrance, Calif. before dawn on Feb. 7.
Police said it was a “case of mistaken identity” that prompted officers to open fire on the women. Beck later apologized and promised to replace their truck, now riddled with bullet holes.
According to Jonas, LAPD and Galpin Ford wanted his clients to pose for a photo opportunity and pay income tax on the truck. The women no longer want the truck after they were told they needed to fill out a 1099 form for the donation, Jonas said Monday.
“You tried to murder the woman, now you’re telling her she can’t have a four-wheel drive, you’re telling her she can’t sell it and you’ve got to be taxed on it?” Jonas said. “How would anyone react to that?”
Jonas plans on filing a government claim, which is a precursor to any lawsuit filed against a government agency. He said he felt the truck was being touted as a “reward or prize” instead of a sincere gesture by the LAPD.
Galpin Ford estimates the value of the truck – a 2013 Ford 150 SuperCrew – at $32,560. The dealership had planned on paying the sales tax, vehicle registration and title on the truck, according to a dealership spokesperson.
“It’s really sad for us because we want to help these women move on with their lives, and help them move forward with that, we just can’t get past the 1099 issue,” LAPD Cmdr. Andrew Smith said. “The government has to take their bite out of it, I guess.”
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Torrance-Newspaper-Delivery-Women-Shot-During-Christopher-Dorner-Manhunt-Truck-LAPD-197241021.html
So the ladies aren’t goint to get the free truck because apparently the LAPD is too fucking stupid to figure out how taxes work.
There needs to be a serious housecleaning in that place.
As the goverment keeps ratcheting up the infringement of our Second Amendment rights it is hard to see any option other than resistance. I see no way this can end in anything but tears, I’m just wondering what the “Reichstadt Fire” will be.
When the phrase “common sense” appears in this context, scare quotes are mandatory. Thirty lashes with an undercooked ramen noodle!
cankles: “what difference does it make?”
Common sense gun control: hit what you are aiming at.
My only compromise is on whether everyone should be required to own a rifle capable of full-auto fire, as everyone is a member of the militia. I’m willing to let it be optional.
Compromise.
I’ll compromise with you, Cranky: They must own it and be proficient in its use.
If that’s how the Ruling Class defines compromise, it’s good enough for me.
The price of being the
dictatorking.“DiFi: “I am not a sixth-grader.””
I am not at all impressed with you, your feigned outbursts of outrage, or your stupid unconstitutional bill. I think you are dim, hateful, and a laughingstock little twerp in an ugly dress. That you are a senator is not an indicator of your personal character and accomplishments. It is an indicator of the great collective stupidity of the voters of California.
good allan that sequester is relentless
Indeed not a sixth grader, for what sixth grader would so vociferously defend their own ignorance? What sixth grader would take such pride in being a moron of the first order? What sixth grader wouldn’t enjoy learning about their most prized political possession from someone clearly intent on helping them learn?
So yes. We should agree. Sen. Mrs. Feinstein more nearly resembles a chunk of rock.
As I have written elsewhere:
“While the Founding Fathers, authors and signers of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, were governing this nation it was a common practice to sign letters of marque.
This allowed private American citizens to buy or build the most modern warship available, equip it with the most modern weapons available, and then use it in open warfare against the nation’s enemies…..for profit no less.
It must also be remembered that those same Founding Fathers purposefully neglected to create a national army, fully expecting private citizens to be sufficently armed with “military” weapons to defend themselves against invasion.
The War of Independence started precisely because the government was attempting to seize privately owned military weapons and supplies, including artillery.
I think we can safely say that the writers of the Bill of Rights knew exactly what they were saying, and what they meant. It is simply undeniable that the original meaning of the 2nd Amendment would allow private citizens to own bazookas.”
I agree, gahrie. I think the founders would expect us to be able to own just about any weapon we could afford to buy. They would certainly not see a problem with us owning any weapon the average soldier carries.
I would simply like to add a comment! Liberals and progressives like the senior Senator from California, along with her associates on the committee have long known that the Constitution is a fixed document that is similar to the Bible; namely, it was written by bold men who fought and fussed with one another about just such amendments! They wrangled and cussed and discussed, until they delivered a document that has the principals that serve eternally and are applicable to any and all pertinent discussions. The Bible is a grander writing, in fact I would submit that it will serve throughout time and is in fact a portion of the mind of Christ! Our constitution should be used daily, like our Bibles! Both are applicable for all time and on any issue of the day.