search
top

First Mention of Guns at DNC

DiFi promises to bring about a new assault weapons ban. One thing is for sure, the Democrats in 2012 have abandoned any pretense of moderation. Well, at least until 10:00 rolls around and the network start airing speeches.

27 Responses to “First Mention of Guns at DNC”

  1. Pyrotek85 says:

    What, they still want to ban guns? Here we are being told we’re all paranoid for thinking that during the last four years…

  2. Roberta X says:

    How To Lose An Election 101: Prof. Feinstein. No prerequisites.

    • Ian Argent says:

      I doubt she’s going to lose her election with that stance.

      • Crotalus says:

        Of course not. She hails from the People’s Demokratik Republik of Kollyvornia. She’s bombproof. We will NEVER vote her out.

        • Ian Argent says:

          Which is an illustration of how nominal members of the same party can really hurt a Presidential candidate by saying things that the member’s base will pass off or want to hear, while the same statement will harm the candidate nationwide.

      • Charlie Foxtro says:

        As an inmate of the Non-Worker’s Paradise of Kalifornia, I have to say that Crotalus is unfortunately 100% correct. Her well known corruption, Left of Hard Left politics, and militant stand on banning all guns (except hers) aren’t anywhere nearly enough to overcome her advantages in unions, media, and money.

        To the good: all of her Botox treatments have got to catch up with her someday.

  3. St Mark says:

    But the Obama administration had not done ANYTHING to harm gun rights. In fact, Obama is much more pro gun then Romney. If you vote Romney then you are anti gun.

    Because it’s written on the internet.

  4. Romney is white Obama says:

    St. Mark

    Romney signed an assault weapons ban in 2006. Of course we have to vote for him to save our 2A rights.

    • Sebastian says:

      Except he didn’t. Look, I don’t blame anyone for dinging him for that signing statement, which was apparently related to a miscommunication with his advisors. But he never signed any AWB. That was done years ago, in 1998, under a previous administration.

      • Drifter says:

        So what you’re basically saying is that he’s stupid enough to sign anything put in front of him without knowing any facts about it?

        • Harold says:

          More like he’s stupid enough to say anything a political adviser tells him to say.

          The observed facts about the signing itself are silent about your theory.

        • Sebastian says:

          It’s hard to say how the signing statement resulted. Governors sign a lot of bills. They don’t read them all cover to cover. They have people who do that, and summarize the bill. It’s possible he got a bad summary, or it’s possible he knew what was in the bill, and got bad advice in regards to a signing statement. We don’t know. But I don’t deny that he bungled that part, and it caused a lot of trouble for the people who worked very hard to get that bill to his desk. It’s perfectly fine by me to hold him accountable for that. But the bill he signed was not an assault weapons ban.

      • Crotalus says:

        How, then, did the rumor that he did sign it get started? (Democrat lies again, perhaps?)

        • Sebastian says:

          It started with the media up in Massachusetts, who reported that the bill was an assault weapons ban, largely based on the title and Romney’s signing statement. The bill was kind of meant to be a false flag, and the media fell for it. So it’s largely a media perpetuated myth.

  5. Bram says:

    If Feinstein is still upset about the Harvey Milk murder, why doesn’t she ban .38 revolvers like the one he was killed with? Dan White didn’t kill anyone with an “assault weapon” – unless revolvers are included in that category now too.

    • Ian Argent says:

      That is her once-stated goal, to ban all firearms

    • Harold says:

      Well, perhaps because after? that she got one of the very few concealed carry licenses SF issued at the time? I think the total then was less than 5, and recently I read it was 0.

    • TS says:

      She did. She banned ALL guns in San Francisco when she became mayor but it was overturned by the courts on state preemption laws.

    • Sigivald says:

      Maybe it was a “military style revolver”, ala the Smith & Wesson MP?

      All them guns are “military style”!

    • Alpheus says:

      Perhaps it’s because that’s her preferred carry weapon? If I recall correctly, she has a concealed carry permit. Of course, I could be wrong–there are so many hypocrites on this issue, it’s hard to keep track of them all.

  6. Sean says:

    I’m going to name my next AR “Diane”

  7. Lergnom says:

    I wish I could find a copy of her 60 minutes interview where she says “mister and missus America, turn them all in.” If it exists on the web, it’s beyond my feeble Google-fu.
    Stay safe

  8. TS says:

    With over 800 miles of coastline, California has plenty of sand that she can go pound.

  9. Matthew Carberry says:

    I forget, was her handgun ban before or after she tipped off the Hillside Strangler of all the evidence police had collected?

  10. Jamie in ND says:

    FU DiFi!!!

  11. Jamie in ND says:

    St Mark says:
    SEP 5, 2012 AT 10:26 PM
    But the Obama administration had not done ANYTHING to harm gun rights. In fact, Obama is much more pro gun then Romney. If you vote Romney then you are anti gun.
    Because it’s written on the internet.
    You frickin ignorant ass! He appointed two SCOTUS justices who are anti-2ndA. People like you have a dangerous lack of common sense.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. SayUncle » Meanwhile, at DemCon - [...] Senator proposes to ban America’s most popular rifle. [...]
  2. A Choice, Not An Echo | Daily Pundit - [...] Choice, Not An Echo Posted on September 6, 2012 9:30 am by Bill Quick…
top