Hand_Rifle_Guy
Member
Oh look, a voluminous pack of lies that the local fishwrap decided to devote about a quarter of the editorial page to.
Chuck "Major Hypocryte" Schumer, and Diane "Concealed Weapons Permit" Finestein, laying the fertilizer on thick, fast and heavy. Try not to
, but it's worth reading just to see what sort of veracity passes for intelligent policy lobbying 'mongst the gungrabber elite these days.
Thanks to The Local Fishwrap, aka The Mercuy Spews, I mean News.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted on Wed, Jul. 02, 2003
Bush must get behind assault weapons ban
By Dianne Feinstein and Charles Schumer
Ten years ago -- on July 1, 1993 -- Gian Luigi Ferri walked into 101 California Street in San Francisco carrying two high-capacity TEC-9 assault pistols. Within minutes, Ferri had murdered eight people and wounded six. The tragedy shook San Francisco and the nation.
At about the same time, Chandran Nathan used an AK-47 to shoot Shaleen Wadhwani, a medical student at New York University Medical School and the fiance of a woman with whom he was obsessed. Nathan fired 20 rounds at Wadhwani and killed him.
The American people saw in these incidents and so many others that military-style assault weapons were the weapons of choice for those seeking to kill a substantial number of people. In the aftermath of these shootings, we in Congress did something that no one had succeeded in doing before: We banned the manufacture and importation of military-style assault weapons.
Drive down supply
The goal of the bill was to drive down the supply of these weapons and make them more difficult to obtain, and to eventually get them off our streets. And in the years following the enactment of the ban, crimes using assault weapons were indeed reduced dramatically.
Contrary to the rhetoric coming from the National Rifle Association at the time, no innocent gun owner lost an assault weapon. No gun was confiscated as a result of the ban. The sky did not fall. And life went on -- but it went on with fewer grievance killers, juveniles and drive-by shooters having access to the most dangerous of firearms.
Despite these results, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay recently said that House Republicans would let the assault weapons ban die in 2004. To those of us who have been in Congress for some time, this comes as little surprise -- after all, the House actually voted to repeal the original assault weapons ban in 1996
In contrast to DeLay and his NRA friends, we don't believe that banned guns like the AK-47, the TEC-9 or the Street Sweeper should once again be manufactured or imported into the United States.
Guns made for killing
These are military guns, with no purpose but the killing of other human beings. They have pistol grips and other features designed solely to allow the weapons to be more easily concealed, and more easily fired from the hip in close quarters combat -- or in places like the schoolyard in Stockton, where five children died; the McDonald's in San Ysidro; the law firm at 101 California Street in San Francisco; Columbine High School; or so many other places where maniacs with their military guns were able to shoot large numbers of people in short periods of time.
That is why we believe that Congress should reauthorize the 1994 law, which will expire Sept. 13, 2004, and why we also want to close a loophole in that law which has allowed more than 50 million large-capacity ammunition clips to be approved for importation into this country over the last eight years. It is these large clips, drums and strips that allow lone gunmen, or small groups of teenagers, to inflict so much damage in such a small amount of time.
There will be some who will say that the current law doesn't go far enough -- and frankly we agree with them. But in an environment where the NRA has such a stranglehold on gun legislation, we will need all the help we can get just to maintain the current ban.
The good news is that President Bush has indicated that he agrees with us. He has already said many times that he supports reauthorization of the assault weapons ban and closing the clip-importation loophole.
It has become unclear in recent days, however, whether the president will truly put his energy behind re-authorizing the assault weapons ban, or whether he will simply allow DeLay and the NRA to kill the bill before it ever gets to his desk.
Reports that the president's advisers are telling people that the ban will go nowhere are troubling, to say the least. We certainly hope that this administration is not using this issue as a cynical campaign ploy. This issue is simply too important.
Americans overwhelmingly support the assault weapons ban, as does law enforcement. We will do all we can to see that the assault weapons ban remains the law of the land. We sincerely hope that the president puts actions behind his words and helps us in that effort.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dianne Feinstein (California) and Charles Schumer (New York) are U.S. senators.
____________________________________________________________
[Cue Meow Mix Music]Lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies...etc.[/Cue Meow Mix Music]
How did we manage to elect such myopic eletist socialist dirtbags at opposite ends of the country? I mean, here in Korny Kaliforny, I can understand it, but sheesh...
Chuck "Major Hypocryte" Schumer, and Diane "Concealed Weapons Permit" Finestein, laying the fertilizer on thick, fast and heavy. Try not to
, but it's worth reading just to see what sort of veracity passes for intelligent policy lobbying 'mongst the gungrabber elite these days. Thanks to The Local Fishwrap, aka The Mercuy Spews, I mean News.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted on Wed, Jul. 02, 2003
Bush must get behind assault weapons ban
By Dianne Feinstein and Charles Schumer
Ten years ago -- on July 1, 1993 -- Gian Luigi Ferri walked into 101 California Street in San Francisco carrying two high-capacity TEC-9 assault pistols. Within minutes, Ferri had murdered eight people and wounded six. The tragedy shook San Francisco and the nation.
At about the same time, Chandran Nathan used an AK-47 to shoot Shaleen Wadhwani, a medical student at New York University Medical School and the fiance of a woman with whom he was obsessed. Nathan fired 20 rounds at Wadhwani and killed him.
The American people saw in these incidents and so many others that military-style assault weapons were the weapons of choice for those seeking to kill a substantial number of people. In the aftermath of these shootings, we in Congress did something that no one had succeeded in doing before: We banned the manufacture and importation of military-style assault weapons.
Drive down supply
The goal of the bill was to drive down the supply of these weapons and make them more difficult to obtain, and to eventually get them off our streets. And in the years following the enactment of the ban, crimes using assault weapons were indeed reduced dramatically.
Contrary to the rhetoric coming from the National Rifle Association at the time, no innocent gun owner lost an assault weapon. No gun was confiscated as a result of the ban. The sky did not fall. And life went on -- but it went on with fewer grievance killers, juveniles and drive-by shooters having access to the most dangerous of firearms.
Despite these results, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay recently said that House Republicans would let the assault weapons ban die in 2004. To those of us who have been in Congress for some time, this comes as little surprise -- after all, the House actually voted to repeal the original assault weapons ban in 1996
In contrast to DeLay and his NRA friends, we don't believe that banned guns like the AK-47, the TEC-9 or the Street Sweeper should once again be manufactured or imported into the United States.
Guns made for killing
These are military guns, with no purpose but the killing of other human beings. They have pistol grips and other features designed solely to allow the weapons to be more easily concealed, and more easily fired from the hip in close quarters combat -- or in places like the schoolyard in Stockton, where five children died; the McDonald's in San Ysidro; the law firm at 101 California Street in San Francisco; Columbine High School; or so many other places where maniacs with their military guns were able to shoot large numbers of people in short periods of time.
That is why we believe that Congress should reauthorize the 1994 law, which will expire Sept. 13, 2004, and why we also want to close a loophole in that law which has allowed more than 50 million large-capacity ammunition clips to be approved for importation into this country over the last eight years. It is these large clips, drums and strips that allow lone gunmen, or small groups of teenagers, to inflict so much damage in such a small amount of time.
There will be some who will say that the current law doesn't go far enough -- and frankly we agree with them. But in an environment where the NRA has such a stranglehold on gun legislation, we will need all the help we can get just to maintain the current ban.
The good news is that President Bush has indicated that he agrees with us. He has already said many times that he supports reauthorization of the assault weapons ban and closing the clip-importation loophole.
It has become unclear in recent days, however, whether the president will truly put his energy behind re-authorizing the assault weapons ban, or whether he will simply allow DeLay and the NRA to kill the bill before it ever gets to his desk.
Reports that the president's advisers are telling people that the ban will go nowhere are troubling, to say the least. We certainly hope that this administration is not using this issue as a cynical campaign ploy. This issue is simply too important.
Americans overwhelmingly support the assault weapons ban, as does law enforcement. We will do all we can to see that the assault weapons ban remains the law of the land. We sincerely hope that the president puts actions behind his words and helps us in that effort.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dianne Feinstein (California) and Charles Schumer (New York) are U.S. senators.
____________________________________________________________
[Cue Meow Mix Music]Lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies...etc.[/Cue Meow Mix Music]
How did we manage to elect such myopic eletist socialist dirtbags at opposite ends of the country? I mean, here in Korny Kaliforny, I can understand it, but sheesh...
