I want to ask you liberals a question about the gun thing.

Bob wrote:What do you think about a prominent U.S. Senator saying that if she had her way she would take away ALL the guns from Americans?

And don't you think it's a little peculiar that the mainstream media is not reporting this. Because I did a google search and only the obscure websites and blogs are talking about it, not the news media.

And no it's not made up or a misquote or out of context because you can watch and listen to her say it.

http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=60E60EB8874E0282DC22BBDDA341BFEB

PkrBum wrote:How would it benefit the world for us law abiding us citizens to be able to defend ourselves?

PkrBum wrote:How would it benefit the world for us law abiding us citizens to be able to defend ourselves?

Bob wrote:

PkrBum wrote:How would it benefit the world for us law abiding us citizens to be able to defend ourselves?

All I know is if that bitch got her way with that and an attempt was actually made to disarm us all, she'd very likely be the first one to get a bullet in her brain pan. And if I could get past her bodyguards it would be my bullet. Although I'd probably have to get in a long line of shooters.

William wrote:

The context was about assault weapons. Are you trying to do the bidding of that wing nut site, doing their job for them spinning it to mean she was talking about confiscating all guns, en toto.

Selective editing w/ an abrupt ending when I'm pretty sure she wasn't finished making her point.

When you've got a stick in your hand you'll stir any pot, won't you...?

PkrBum wrote:You do realize that that is the tide... right?

Bob wrote:

William wrote:

The context was about assault weapons. Are you trying to do the bidding of that wing nut site, doing their job for them spinning it to mean she was talking about confiscating all guns, en toto.

Selective editing w/ an abrupt ending when I'm pretty sure she wasn't finished making her point.

When you've got a stick in your hand you'll stir any pot, won't you...?

Well because of your post I went back and listened to it closely again.
And it's really not clear either way. She could be referring only to assault weapons and she could be referring to all guns. But it requires seeing the video uncut to know which.
I'll try to find that if I can.

William wrote:

PkrBum wrote:You do realize that that is the tide... right?

.....................................

Bullshit.

Bob wrote:I think William may be right about this.

I found this...

Discussing why the 1994 act only prohibited the manufacture or import of assault weapons, instead of the possession and sale of them, Feinstein said on CBS-TV's 60 Minutes, February 5, 1995, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here."[26]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Dianne_Feinstein#Gun_politics

It looks like those internet news and blog sites were making something more of this than it actually was. Her comment that she would "pick up every one of them" was referring to possession of assault weapons. She was saying that she couldn't get the votes to include posession but if she could have she would have supported that.
She wasn't referring to "all guns".

PkrBum wrote:There's nothing quite like a list to simplify a task.

Bob wrote:I should have been more skeptical. Even if a Senator wanted to ban all guns, he/she would not be stupid enough to advocate that publically.

PkrBum wrote:Is there a tide?

William wrote:

PkrBum wrote:Is there a tide?

...........................

Looks like you believe there is.


If same sax marriage does become legal, will there be a tide that will lead to man on dog marriage...?

Santorum and a lot of equally zealous idiots cling to that absurd notion.

It must be awful living in constant fear of the government, driving on their roads and drinking their water, enjoying their power grid, and yes....chatting to us on their internet, pining for being free and independent of government, not expecting them to solve any of our problems.

How's that working for ya...?

William wrote:

Bob wrote:I should have been more skeptical. Even if a Senator wanted to ban all guns, he/she would not be stupid enough to advocate that publically.

............................................

No doubt.

That would be almost as stoopid as making pot illegal.

William wrote:



It must be awful living in constant fear of the government, driving on their roads and drinking their water, enjoying their power grid, and yes....chatting to us on their internet, pining for being free and independent of government, not expecting them to solve any of our problems.

How's that working for ya...?

There's no situation too complicated that it cannot be over simplified by zealots and true believers.