A Complete Waste of Space

I think he would have done what he's doing now, but he would have done it before the election. No more, no less. My honest answer.

callmeslick wrote:who is they, and when is one of you going to provide REAL PROOF?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01 ... apons-ban/

According to a summary from Feinstein's office, her bill would place bans on 120 "specifically named firearms," as well as certain other semiautomatic guns -- and those with a fixed magazine that can hold more than 10 rounds.

While the 1994 law defined an assault weapon as one that had, in most cases, a detachable magazine and at least two characteristics as set by Congress, the new bill would define an assault weapon as one that meets just one of those characteristics.

There goes a butt load of .22 rimfire rifles to include my wifes Marlin 39A lever action rifle.

There's yer proof Slick, it's from today, deny that

Diane Feinstein has any real power to get that passed? Who knew? Still bullshit from your end.

Then again, consider the news source. Home of the Panic Button and making a buck on your wildest fears.

Your answer is the bull shit.

You asked/demanded proof on your terms.

You got it.

You smoke it.

If'n ya can't handle the truth?
Don't ask for it and damn sure don't whine about it..yer sounding like?
R_D, lately.

Pudfark wrote:Your answer is the bull shit.

You asked/demanded proof on your terms.

and, if you could read plain English, I said 'any person in a position of real power' That ain't Diane Feinstein. She represents the extreme left and always has.
That bill wouldn't pass the Democratic caucus as it stands, and you ought to know that.....but probably don't because Fox didn't clue you in.

Ooooh...the "real power" thingy....

So Feinstein doesn't hold an elected office.
She holds the "rank" equivalent to "Joe the Plumber"....

Pathetic, Slick....really.

Here's where we differ slick. I believe we both agree that Obama is trying to get a ban on assault guns.

Where we differ is you think that will be the end of it, and I think it's just a stepping stone to a total ban someday. At least that what they want, but won't get.

So, this argument work go anywhere.

I'd rather talk about how lousy the Pats are.

Buzz wrote:Here's where we differ slick. I believe we both agree that Obama is trying to get a ban on assault guns.

actually, around 75% of the Electorate is calling for an assault weapon ban of some sort. Few of them wish to see a weapons ban, and as I once said to Pud, the most dangerous thing that pro-gun advocates who are responsible gun owners can do is to stand with the rabid fools such as Ted Nugent and the likes who like to stir up the flames around, "they're coming for yer guns". Just not true....

So...Senator Feinstein is a "rabid fool"....like Nugent?

Did ya read the link I posted about Feinstein?
Part of what she's proposing is "confiscation" without "compensation".

Slick...without the cooperation of "local" government?
How ya think all of this is gonna work out?

Ya know...thinking back to the time of 1994-2004...I can't recall
anyone ever being arrested for breaking "Feinstein's Law"...Can You?

The way you have chosen to articulate in these threads?
Put's you in the "rabid fool" category.

Pudfark wrote:So...Senator Feinstein is a "rabid fool"....like Nugent?

yup, different sides of the issue, but similar.

as for the rest, it will never pass, so the point isn't worth discussing.