Jump to content
RobCo

ITS ON: Dianne Feinstein Introduces Ban on 205 Different ‘Assault Weapons’

Recommended Posts

That fuckin ass tied to the chinese, Didn't that dried up old CUXT have a chinese spy driving the old CXNT around for like 20 fuckin years and nothing was done, like that little faggot with fing fing or fan fan whatever! Really got me pissed now

 You guys know I am an old fuck and probably will not be around too much longer. But this country is FUCKED!!! I really  don't know, They have the MSM and papers tied up! Now they have the voting tied up! Only ones really fighting back are the Proud Boys in oregon and wa. Maybe a little in DC. 

Once they get the guns you know its DONE!!! first assault, then all semis, then semi handguns, Then you semi shotguns. I won;t see it but you young guys have to get involved , Write and email your congressman NOW!!!

RANT over.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No big surprise in that both New Jersey senators are sponsors of the bill.

Even though Feinstein introduces a similar bill  every year, there's more democrat traction this year.  Given that Republicans are better at being the minority, I hope they make the filibuster work.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, father-of-three said:

No big surprise in that both New Jersey senators are sponsors of the bill.

Even though Feinstein introduces a similar bill  every year, there's more democrat traction this year.  Given that Republicans are better at being the minority, I hope they make the filibuster work.

Hoping that Machine and Sinema have the backbone to stand against this, or at least stand against eliminating the filibuster rule.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, BaconThief said:

Get ready for the next 4 years of this. They are going to be throwing a lot of shit at the wall to see what sticks.

Less than 2 years of this nonsense if the Republicans can take back the senate in the midterms!

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, gleninjersey said:

It would need 10 Republican Senators to vote for it.  

Not going to happen.

 

8 hours ago, JohnnyB said:

Depends on the fate of the Filibuster!

Yes, we're hanging on by our fingernails with the filibuster, a tradition that has been around for over 150 years to ensure that sweeping legislation has bipartisan support. IIRC, when the Republicans were in charge from 2017-2019, it was the filibuster that prevented us from getting national concealed carry.  But the Dems and the media are promoting the narrative that their agenda is so righteous that obstructionist Republicans should not be allowed to prevent the American people from experiencing the full benefit of the leftist agenda. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, gleninjersey said:

It would need 10 Republican Senators to vote for it.  

Not going to happen.

Keep in mind the traitors who voted to impeach Trump,  I think it was 10 if I remember.     I wouldn't count any of them as supporters regardless of what states they are from.    Murkowski, romney and collins are from basically pro gun states and one would think they would vote against this but who knows.  

The democrats dont make the same mistakes that the republicans make.  The democrats fight as a team, the republicans seem to vote individually .    If we voted as a team we would not be in this war right now,  If paul ryan and mcconnel  supported Trump 100% of the time Americans would be firmly in control of the country.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tunaman said:

Buy your Mini 14's and Browning BAR's while you still can

Your ARs will be gone as well as M1As and maybe M1s!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2021 at 8:49 AM, Tunaman said:

Buy your Mini 14's and Browning BAR's while you still can

LOL. Got a Mini last month.

Manchin and Sinema both come from Gun states. The 2nd is a big career killer for a lot of politicians who consider voting against it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 1LtCAP said:

do you trust the electoral process at this point?

No

2 hours ago, JohnnyB said:

It's the only system we have so no other choice!

We have a different system, but it would require men to put on their "Big Boy" pants to implement.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Sniper said:

No

We have a different system, but it would require men to put on their "Big Boy" pants to implement.

And some women too, no doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tunaman said:

They are gonna need more than that fence......

Calvera: New wall.

Chris: There are lots of new walls, all around.

Calvera: They won't keep me out!

Chris: They were built to keep you in.

    The Magnificent Seven

What happens when it's too dangerous to go home?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, JohnnyB said:

It's the only system we have so no other choice!

well i'll letcha in on a little secret(although most of you guys probably already pegged me to be something like this). i have NEVER trusted the system. because of that i used to refuse to participate in their game by voting. it took me some years(somewhere in my mid/late 20's) before i realized that even if i don't trust the system that i had no right to bitch/whine unless i did. that's when i started voting. i really have always felt that my vote didn't/doesn't count. if anything, that feeling's actually gotten stronger. especially with the blatant hijinks they've showed us this past election.

 no. i do not believe the pedo won the election. i do truly believe that the election was already decided well before it happened(as i believe they all have been). i believe that the 16 election was already decided too, but that trump accidentally won. i don't think he or anyone else expected it, and that is why they went so hard after him, and they will continue to go after him now that he's out just as a "message" to not fuck with the system.

i may be right, i may be wrong, or it may be somewhere in the murky waters in between right n wrong.....

12 hours ago, Sniper said:

No

We have a different system, but it would require men to put on their "Big Boy" pants to implement.

sadly, the vast majority of people that would be otherwise able to do that are too "comfy" in their lifestyles, most likely not willing to give that lifestyle up, and overall have way too much to lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/19/2021 at 11:33 PM, 1LtCAP said:

sadly, the vast majority of people that would be otherwise able to do that are too "comfy" in their lifestyles, most likely not willing to give that lifestyle up, and overall have way too much to lose.

Well I have news for those comfy assholes, their lifestyle is gonna change drastically if this prick and his hoe get their way. They'll wake up one morning and say to themselves "How did this happen?"

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of wish it would go through. A case of that magnitude would certainly have to be taken up by the Supreme Court. Given what's in the Heller ruling and Scalia's explanation that it applied to all firearm's in common use I don't see any way they could not strike it down as Unconstitutional.

If Scalia's explanation of, it applied to all firearm's in common use, were brought up in such a trail, I'm sure the Government/defense would cite that Scalia's explanation (that it applied to all firearm's in common use) end's with at the time. That may sound damning to the 2A's argument. BUT Common (civilian held) firearms at the time were identical (if not the exact same maker and model) to the Military/assault rifles used in the Revolutionary War. Looking at it from that perspective may even put a spotlight on the constitutionality of restrictions on actual M-16's and other actual assault weaponry.

Thats a stretch but who know what can of worms could be opened in an AWB case with Constitutionalist vs ideological justices hearing it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...