Gun regs weekend
It was a big weekend for the gun grabbers in the news. First Nanny Bloomberg wrote an opinion piece in his own Bloomberg news service entitled “How to Break NRA’s Grip on Politics” in which he thinks that the NRA is a threat to the gun control agenda;
The NRA is a $200 million-plus-a-year lobbying juggernaut, with much of its funding coming from gun manufacturers and merchandising. More than anything, the NRA is a marketing organization, and its flagship product is fear. Gun sales jumped after Obama was elected president, based on the absurd — and now demonstrably false — fear that he would seek to ban guns.
Yeah, politicians are not scared of the NRA, they’re scared of voters who will vote them out if they adopt a gun-grabbing tilt. The NRA is nothing without voters. Of course, Bloomberg has nothing to fear from the NRA since there are very few gun owners in his city. But, then Nanny Bloomberg also took up the fight against women feeding their babies from a bottle this weekend, too.
In round two, everyone seems worried that USSC Justice Antonin Scalia came out for gun control by claiming that the issue of large capacity magazines will have to be decided in the court. He also said that whether Americans can own rocket launchers will have to be decided by the court. He didn’t say there was no room for gun legislation because that would give the appearance that he’s already made up his mind about the issue, and what would be judicious about that? But the chattering nabobs on both sides are using Scalia’s very few words on the issue in this interview as an indication that more gun legislation could make it through the courts. But that’s not what Scalia said. Watch the whole interview like I did instead of reading the few bullet lines in the press.
Meanwhile Democrat Senators are trying to stick an amendment into the cybersecurity bill that will regulate guns, according to The Hill;
The amendment was sponsored by Democratic Sens. Frank Lautenberg (N.J.), Barbara Boxer (Calif.), Jack Reed (R.I.), Bob Menendez (N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Schumer and Dianne Feinstein (Calif.). S.A. 2575 would make it illegal to transfer or possess large capacity feeding devices such as gun magazines, belts, feed stripes and drums of more than 10 rounds of ammunition with the exception of .22 caliber rim fire ammunition.
The amendment is identical to a separate bill sponsored by Lautenberg. Feinstein was the sponsor of the assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004.
So, I immediately ordered two more large capacity magazines, just to piss them off. Unless I’m swarmed by zombies, I’ll probably never use them, except to piss off the gun grabbers.
Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists
NHSparky: as usual, insipid is either simply MSU (making stuff up) or is parroting talking points he didn’t bother to research. Per the Brady Campaign, MD is the 7th most restrictive state in the nation regarding firearms regulation – behind only CA, NJ, MA, NY, CT, and HI – and is more restrictive than either RI or IL.
http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/stateleg/scorecard/2011/2011_Brady_Campaign_State_Scorecard_Rankings.pdf
Jacobite I don’t really read anything he has to say I just see that he posts and then post a reply based on the topic and see if he responds. In one story Poettrooper did about suffering Trolls I said something about him and Joe being the Village idiots and they add their particular color to our vibrant community. Well, in a way, insipid does add to our community, he shows us how the empty skulls on the other side think. I understand fully that arguing with him in any way is as useful as pissing in the wind, but it does give us some knowledge in the way a libtard thinks. If you could come up with a well reasoned argument enough you could probably get insipid to move onto a collective farm to work for the good of the people.
I know Jason, I’ve argued with the idiot before, just thought I’d throw my two cents worth in and I really didn’t feel like exposing his falsehoods AGAIN. Short on patience this week I guess.