Co-Sponsor Of Bill Banning Magazines Demonstrates She Doesn't Know What They Are

Status
Not open for further replies.
If I were so inept and ignorant at my job, not only would I excuse myself from working, but people would die. Does shame not motivate this person to resign and drop the bill she is sponsoring?
 
Are you suggesting that there should be a national registry of voters or people who can publish books or letter to the editor or post on internet forums and then certain people should be disqualified for certain characteristics? Similar to how we disqualify certain people from owning firearms?
Click to expand...

Nope, but I am saying some people shouldn't be able to vote.
 
The ones that I disagree with, lol.

I'm simply saying voters should be knowable of how gov. works and informed on the canadiates and issues and today most voters aren't. Could you imagine if at the next election they were to ask "what are the three branches of gov?" If you can't answer go home. A very simple basic question and it would likely turn away over half of voters.

Voting is a privilege not a right, there should be some qualification. In agreement with your point, there is no one (other than myself :D) who should be able to dictate who gets the privilege and who doesn't. The government couldn't do it, we have the proof of history, they have never done anything right. So you get what we have now, go to YouTube search stupid voters, uninformed voters, ect and watch the videos then ask yourself if you really want those people voting for people who hold the power destroy our rights and our country.
 
Last edited:
Jlr2267 said:
Which ones?
Click to expand...

I would propose that only the citizens that end up paying a net positive to the local/state/federal each year get to vote. (taxes - benefits > $0.01) Should get the FSA off our backs, and have the benefit of having to identify yourself at the polls!
 
Not for American citizens it isn't.
Click to expand...


I think not knowing this might disqualify one from voting
Click to expand...


I hate to disappoint you but the SCOTUS and almost 200 years worth of blacks and women disagree with you.






Edit:
research Alexander v Mineta

In its 2000 ruling, Alexander v Mineta, the Court affirmed the district court’s interpretation that our Constitution “does not protect the right of all citizens to vote, but rather the right of all qualified citizens to vote.” And it’s state legislatures that wield the power to decide who is “qualified.”
 
Last edited:
LOLOLOLOLOL!

What a clown. I like the part where someone is going to pull one of these maneuvers during a magazine change:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vh4Kx9IqIZw

Here's an idea that could make her sleep better at night:

'Don't open your mouth and say idiotic things when there is a microphone in front of it. Especially if you have no clue about what you are trying to talk about.'

(I'm talking about Degette, not women's suffrage of the voting rights act of '64.)
 
IlikeSA said:
DeGette was upset that her comments went viral and wrote a letter to the Denver Post (a rather liberal newspaper) attacking the newspaper. It's fairly big news here in the Denver metro area. I have been hearing it discussed on the morning radio shows.

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_22956534/degette-politics-gun-violence-prevention

Read the article comments for a good laugh as well.
Click to expand...

IlikeSA,
Thanks for the posting. Wow, she's using terms like "seized upon remarks" and "the fervor these remarks has created ..." all this is just attempting to cover up that she had no idea what she's talking about. And then she says "The truth — thus far absent from the discussion — is this ...". Never in her message did she saying anything about her being ignorant of the facts. It's just that now, (paraphrase) they are making fun of me.

I especially liked the comment from the individual who said: "Diana, I've followed your Congressional career for over 15 years. I can honestly say, no matter the topic, you are completely out of your depth."

chuck
 
To paraphrase her response letter then:

"You are all taking my words out of context, and it's causing virals! You all know what I mean, stop being so mean, and detracting from the main point. Everyone knows these magazines are just plain dangerous. No hunter would need a magazine with a reloadable assault clip thing...that goes up...you know. Dry up the supply! Protecting the rights of hunters! Common sense! You all know what I'm talking about. Stop laughing at me! Stop it! Stoooop!"

Is that about right?
 
Hacker15E said:
Not for American citizens it isn't.
Click to expand...

In Australia it isn't a right...it is manadatory


I just hope even the voters who are not big into 2nd amendment rights see this woman for what she is....a person too dangerous to be in a position of legislative power

I'd also like to say...the gun grabbers keep using the phrase "responsible gun control".....if the don't even know the function of those things which they are legislating, then they are being irresponsible.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, she's a piece of work alright. I fervently hope she's voted out next go-around. I'm sure she also has no clue that her "safer" 15 round magazines could just be duct-taped together in a cluster of 3 or 4. She'd probably wet herself at that news, and then create a bill to ban or regulate "assault duct tape".
 
She obviously thought she was banning some type of ammo. The reality is they are going to give up on gun control and go after ammo. There was a comment made back around 2008 to this effect. Cant remember exactly who(feinstein?) Said we could have all the guns we want but would be worthless if ammo was non-existant or so expensive we couldnt afford it. Kinda sounds like today huh.
 
Wait, don't they know that any ammo which uses "centerfire" ignition, or any "rimfire" ammo that uses either a brass or stainless steel case is the kind that gets 'spoiled' after a certain amount of time, and that we can't use it beyond it's shelf life anyway? They should only allow that kind to be produced, that way we can't stockpile it. Oops, shhhh. Sorry.

Duck season! Wabbit season! Wabbit season! Duck season!
 
Compared to her, I've flushed more brain cells down the toilet this morning after I woke up........

Absolutely amazing how they open mouths, insert feet, yet the media does nothing but they sure crawled all over Bush for a slight misspoken word
 
"Not for American citizens it isn't. "
Maybe we need a minimum standard set to be an American citizen.
With rights comes responsibilities, if you're irresponsible why couldn't or shouldn't you have your rights taken away?
 
DeepSouth said:
I hate to disappoint you but the SCOTUS and almost 200 years worth of blacks and women disagree with you.






Edit:
research Alexander v Mineta

In its 2000 ruling, Alexander v Mineta, the Court affirmed the district court’s interpretation that our Constitution “does not protect the right of all citizens to vote, but rather the right of all qualified citizens to vote.” And it’s state legislatures that wield the power to decide who is “qualified.”
Click to expand...


You left out around 100 years of many White males not being allowed to vote either. For a long time, you had to be an actual land owner and also wealthy enough to be taxed. "Then" you could have a say in representation.;)
 
She is indeed astoundingly ignorant of a topic which she should frankly be an expert in.

To address another topic in this thread - There is precisely one thing that could save the USA: a qualified franchise. That would repair the USA in one election cycle.
 
I responded to her editorial. I think I was too nice:
Ms. DeGette,

While I understand and respect your desire to reduce gun violence and violence in general I recommend that you either step down from your post or cease to push ineffective legislation on a topic to which you have demonstrated a complete lack of understanding. As a public figure, you are subject to ridicule and criticism. Please accept that as fact and grow some thick skin instead of attacking everyone who calls you out for ignorant comments you make. Please do not try to spin it around and claim that others are just trying to bury the issue because you're only making excuses in an attempt to not look bad. People make mistakes and it is best to own up to them.

Magazines are containers for ammo that can be refilled over and over. Clips are used to fill magazines or magazine wells and they can also be use repeatedly so inform your staff not to try to make up lame excuses for you that do not make any sense.

Your legislation is far from "common sense" so please stop using that term. It is offensive to people who actually have common sense and can think for themselves. Making law-abiding citizens into criminals, taking away their constitutional rights, and telling them that they will probably die if more than one person attacks them in their home lacks intelligent thought and comes off as though you don't actually care. You seem to have a typical elitist attitude toward the people of your state and just want to have your way.

Please do your research about the subjects for which you are writing laws and make an attempt to honest rather than twisting everything to fit your needs. You are human and not above the people who voted (or didn't vote) you into the position you hold. Do not take that lightly. May God Bless You.
Click to expand...
 
My response to her whining article:

A reality check for DeGette.

1) Criminals do not care if there is a ban on magazines, just as they do not care if there is a ban on Cocaine or Robbery or Murder, they do what they do and will get what they want/need because they are criminals.

2) The only half truths and distorted facts are coming from you and people that would rather disarm law abiding citizens than concentrate on the actual causes of mass shootings.

3) Again with the 'time to escape while they reload' nonsense, clearly you did not watch the video I put up before that shows how there is no time to either 'take down' or 'escape' from a shooter when they change out magazines. Talk about continuing to put for distorted facts, here you are doing it AGAIN.

4) You can claim you misspoke, and your spokeswoman came out and clarified your statements, saying you meant to say 'clip' instead of 'magazine'. That made it worse, as that made no sense just like your original statement, and add to that it shows you had no intent of addressing the original question.

5) Again you end with the default to 'it's about the children'. No, it's not about the children, if it was about the children y ou would actually care and look into the root causes of all this violence, and not be legislating to ban what is involved in less than 1% of all the murders out there. Perhaps you actually believe going after such a small item matters, but it doesn't, not if you actually care about 'the children'.

6) Citizens of this Country have started to wake up and take notice, thus your style of uneducated, agenda driven politics is coming to an end. You are going to have to deal with that.
Click to expand...
 
You left out around 100 years of many White males not being allowed to vote either. For a long time, you had to be an actual land owner and also wealthy enough to be taxed. "Then" you could have a say in representation
Click to expand...

What's wrong with that?
Those who are taxed to pay the bills should be the ones to decide HOW and WHAT that money is spent on - by electing those they see fit. Folks on the welfare dole are going to vote for more of the same (witness these last two elections) even though they do not financially support anything

Lawmakers who have ZERO knowledge of a subject should recuse themselves from that topic

As was once said: " Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak up and remove all doubt"..... Lincoln or Twain
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Justin
  • Locked
Dianne DeGette (D, CO) to Introduce Magazine Ban in the House
2 3
Replies
71
Views
5K
JTHunter
JTHunter
H
  • Locked
Bills to stop online ammo sales, ban hi cap mags, limit rifle buys
2 3
Replies
61
Views
3K
Hokkmike
Hokkmike
A
  • Locked
No new ban after all?
Replies
6
Views
777
LKB3rd
L
LiveLife
  • Locked
Fact check: Would new House/Senate bills BAN assault weapons? - Verdict: CONFIRMED!
Replies
14
Views
1K
Kleanbore
K
E
  • Locked
Proposed Semi-Auto firearm ban in Washington State
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
XavierBreath
XavierBreath
Back
Top