Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), "'assault' weapon bans are just the beginning".

reply to post by GreenGlassDoor


All you do is insult people, which I guess is ok, since I insult you back. Back and forth it goes.

But I asked some important questions and all you do is deflect. Typical conservative attitude. Deflect, deflect and then deflect some more.

I am not even mad at you any more. I find your posts quite amusing to be honest!

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Providing liberals with facts and figures is pointless because the liberal suffers from brain damage and cannot process information the way a rational person can. I told the liberal outright that I wasn't going to play the liberal game of answering loaded questions. Which, of course, infuriates the liberal. They kick their feet and scream and act like a child who musters out between sobs, "Why...won't...you...play...with...me?"

Never mind that the questions posed by the liberal start with a "blame America first" assumption, which is obvious to even the most casual observer. The liberal, of course, cannot see this as years of indoctrination have blinded them.

reply to post by GreenGlassDoor


You simply can't answer my question but insist on calling people brain-damaged and whatnot. Wow, the irony is staggering here. Let me ask the question one last time before I leave you to your miserable existance. Why is the UN sanctioning NK to the point that they want to nuke us and south korea? Surely one left organisation will not incite the other, correct?

Nothing loaded. You simply can't answer because I am correct. Keep playing the hyperbole game with yourself. I explained to you what the illuminati was many posts ago, and it had nothing to do with communism. I also agree with preserving the second amendment as much as possible. Honestly I have no idea what the hell your problem is. Just arguing for the sake of arguing I guess...

reply to post by GreenGlassDoor
oh like Sen D. Feinstein when asked about the ban news.yahoo.com... from the link

The Senate Judiciary Committee voted in favor of the assault weapons ban bill today, the most controversial of the gun measures put forward since the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, which occurred three months ago today.

The assault weapons ban, which was sponsored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., passed on a strictly party-line vote - 10-8 - and faced fierce opposition from Republicans on the committee, at one point turning personal when Sen. Ted Cruz, R- Texas, questioned Feinstein about the constitutionality of her bill.

"The question that I would pose to the senior senator from California is would she deem it consistent with the Bill of Rights for Congress to engage in the same endeavor that we are contemplating doing with the Second Amendment in the context of the First or Fourth Amendment?" Cruz asked.

"I'm not a sixth grader," Feinstein said in response. "Senator, I've been on this committee for 20 years. I was a mayor for nine years. I walked in, I saw people shot. I've looked at bodies that have been shot with these weapons. I've seen the bullets that implode. In Sandy Hook, youngsters were dismembered."

"I'm not a lawyer, but after 20 years I've been up close and personal to the Constitution. I have great respect for it. This doesn't mean that weapons of war and the Heller decision clearly points out three exceptions, two of which are pertinent here," she said. "It's fine you want to lecture me on the Constitution. I appreciate it. Just know I've been here for a long time. I've passed on a number of bills. I've studied the Constitution myself. I am reasonably well educated, and I thank you for the lecture."

"Congress is in the business of making law. The Supreme Court interprets the law," she said.

Feinstein later apologized to Cruz for her response to him, saying "Senator I want to apologize to you. You sort of got my dander up and that happens on occasion."

Feinstein's bill calls for the banning of semi-automatic weapons with at least one military feature and specifically names 157 weapons which would be prohibited. It additionally bans high-capacity magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds.

The assault weapons ban was the final gun measure passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee over the past week. On Tuesday, the committee voted in favor of a bill which enhances school safety and a background check bill, which along with the assault weapons ban, will face opposition from Republicans and moderate Democrats on the Senate floor. Last week, the committee passed a gun trafficking bill which makes "straw" purchasing illegal.

Each of these bills will now face consideration on the Senate floor, likely next month.

An ABC News/Washington Post poll released this week found that 57 percent of the public supports an assault weapons ban - fewer than the 91 percent who are in favor of universal background checks and 82 percent who support gun trafficking legislation.

with a statement like this

"I'm not a sixth grader," Feinstein said in response. "Senator, I've been on this committee for 20 years. I was a mayor for nine years. I walked in, I saw people shot. I've looked at bodies that have been shot with these weapons. I've seen the bullets that implode. In Sandy Hook, youngsters were dismembered."

i can see her doing what you said on the floor yelling kicking screaming, and that is when she in on the sen floor

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Pay attention to the video previously posted. Crisis is what is needed to perpetrate the liberal agenda. Without the ability to frighten people as a means of distraction the liberal agenda of swindling freedom cannot move forward.

reply to post by pjfry

Let's assume guns weren't THAT easy to get and he didn't have one with him, also the Police woulnd't assume that a kid carries a gun, would this 16 year old dude still live? I bet he would.

I say that the kid was carrying illegally, and that isn't the crux of our arguement here. You can assume all you want to, but the fact remains that even if good folks give up their guns, the illegal carriers won't do the same.

I really don't see your point here.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


No, it's because they think they now have a mandate to do whatever they want and people will let them.

reply to post by gladtobehere


Your comment is exactly why I get so upset when I see people make comments like: "nobody needs assault weapons there is no reason for them" ----well, like you said, it will not stop at assault weapons, they will start big, and then pick away at anything that is left.
I was researching last night, different states, and their gun laws, and I was surprised at how different laws, and exceptions there are. It even dwindles down to what states can carry a knife hidden and which ones have to have it showing. At this point, Im surprised they have not started with that sh**. This whole mess is sad, here I set, with an AR15 that I love, that I cannot afford to shoot anymore. Its not only the 223 ammo, its even my .45 cal ammo. Im starting to do some research on Canada, and exactly what happened with them and guns, mainly to see the warning signs if it happens here, and Id like to learn more about why we have half a million UN Tanks, Service Trucks, Cars, Emergency Vehicles, and armored cars being railroaded in here, what if anything do you or anyone know about this? (see youtube UN Tanks Video)

Feinstein the number one sponsor of the gun control act has been on record, on camera stating she will not debate the gun control bill s.150 (reasonably so there are so many holes in this bill it looks like a slice of Swiss cheese) and that she is "running her own campaign" for this bill. Ridiculous how sooo many Americans will just "go along" for the ride with her not even questioning what is at the end of the tunnel. Lemmings walking off the cliff...

Well, that is the first time I have seen any political hack be that direct about gun bans. I wonder if she is speaking for the majority of the American Liberals? Such language she is using is not even on the table on capital hill. She might be on the fringe.

Originally posted by GreenGlassDoor
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

Pay attention to the video previously posted. Crisis is what is needed to perpetrate the liberal agenda. Without the ability to frighten people as a means of distraction the liberal agenda of swindling freedom cannot move forward.

So you joined ATS just to bash liberals and give conservatives a free pass? If you want my honest opinion conservatives have done more damage to america than liberals. The only thing conservatives whine about is gun laws. They don't care about any financial corruption of the markets.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

No, it's because they think they now have a mandate to do whatever they want and people will let them.

Nonsense. Yes they have a mandate but we don't live in a totalitarian state yet. A lot of folks have spoken and the federal government has taken notice. That is what is supposed to happen in a democracy or a republic, minus all the inherited corruption.

Reply to post by EarthCitizen07

More liberal make-believe. If the liberal spent less time investigating their colon and more time investigating the outside world they would understand the concerns of the people are not addressed, while the liberal agitprop agenda marches "Forward!"

The GOP isn't a party of concerned persons, as they have become what the Democrat party was, absorbing the political refugees when the liberal subversion of the Democrats swung into full force. Ronald Reagan started life as a Democrat, but felt the party left him behind.

Today, persons like Paul, Cruz, Rubio, and DeMint may wright the ship -but time will tell.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

that's over the line

I don't have a problem with high capacity clips or assault rifles, but hand guns are necessary for defense and whatever

they need to be stopped at this point