Here They Come After The Guns -Get Ready For A Massive Struggle

Warthog

Shits & Giggles ARE OVER!
Feinstein rumored to be pushing semi-auto ban if Obama reelected
Elections 2012
November 6, 2012
By: David Codrea
Subscribe

Will Feinstein celebrate an Obama victory with a new assault on gun rights?

California Senator Dianne Feinstein‘s Washington, D.C. “…staff held meetings on Friday with FTB/ATF [Firearms Technology Branch/ Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives] legal staff to discuss a new ‘Assault Weapons Ban,” Jim Shepherd of The Shooting Wire reported yesterday, characterizing the meeting as a “rumor” based on “pretty good intelligence.”

Feinstein’s rumored bill “would ban pistol grips and "high-capacity" magazines, eliminate any grandfathering and ban sales of ‘weapons in possession’" Shepherd writes.

Gun Rights Examiner has been holding on to identical information attempting to get verification, but with its publication in a prominent gun owner community venue, it becomes legitimate to share the discussion. This correspondent received an email from a source purported to be forwarded from Lawrence G. Keane, Senior Vice President, Assistant Secretary and General Counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which stated:


I just heard that Sen. Feinstein’s attorney is meeting right now with folks from FTB and ATF legal (Eric Epstein [legal], Todd Martin [Legal] and Earl Griffith [FTB] and others) to discuss a new SAW ban, that she would want to start pushing through as soon as (if) Obama gets reelected.

- - No pistol grip allowed
- - No HC Mags
- - No grandfathering
- - No sale permissible if in possession

That is all I know right now

This is certainly consistent with President Obama's call in the debates to re-up the federal semi-auto ban (as well as go after handguns), and is further circumstantially corroborated by a new NSSF release relating how Feinstein continues to defend ATF actions in Fast and Furious gunwalking, all the while still "claiming, erroneously, that 70 percent of guns seized in Mexico were traced to the United States."

Since Keane was the purported source of the email, he was the one to ask about its authenticity.

“Just got this forwarded to me--is it genuine?” this correspondent emailed earlier today.

No reply has been sent at this writing, so the query was extended to another insider source to probe its credibility.

"The ATF personnel noted are indeed the players,” the source replied, “but what is noticeably absent is anyone from the executive level, AD or DAD [Assistant Director/Deputy Assistant Director]--the policy implementer/makers. That part is strange and shows that while ATF may have had to go to the meeting, the Bureau and DoJ are not necessarily supportive.

"In addition, the cost of enforcement and regulation would be tremendous,” the source continued. “I don’t see the financial aspect being supported if such a law were passed unless it is revenue neutral and ownership was taxed like NYC does with guns.”

There's then the matter of how likely, barring an unforeseen event, such a bill would be to make it to the White House for signature. While the current political thought is not very, political thought can change with the circumstances of the day, and who really knows what events could put such legislation on the front burner?

But even if Feinstein's latest assault on liberty fizzles, one unexpected prediction in the source's reply may prove to be a bombshell if [his/her] instincts are right, and remember, this is someone who knows the Bureau and the culture it operates in, so the opinion can't just be dismissed as wild speculation:

“My true feeling is that ATF is likely toast after the election, no matter who wins."
http://www.examiner.com/article/feinstein-rumored-to-be-pushing-semi-auto-ban-if-obama-reelected
 

Dixielee

Veteran Member
"No sale permissible if in possession"
Does that mean, you can't possess it and you can't sell it? What a typical liberal proposal!
 

BH

. . . .
Did you fill out a 4473 or do you order ammo on a credit card in your name ????

or have you been diligent for years and pay cash for everything and look for naive private sales ????

bigger question yet, did you give a 10 card and all personal info for the 'right' to exercise your right to carry (at least until it becomes illegal, when they come for you at least you will not have to be printed)

if you have formed and unformed hardware, it is now time to separate one from the other....
 

Blue 5

Veteran Member
If they're looking for a fight, they'll get one. I'm not registering, turning in, or allowing any pointy-eared bureaucrat to tell me what I can do with my firearms. They will have to kill me, and everyone like me, to take them.

Bring it.
 

BH

. . . .
"No sale permissible if in possession"
Does that mean, you can't possess it and you can't sell it? What a typical liberal proposal!
Damn, that would kinda make you a criminal any way you look at it. Nah, could never be....
 

mbabulldog

Veteran Member
You and I both know that the she-bitch would never come herself....she'll send some lowly cop just doin his job.
agreed. and that lowly cop will have to decide if my guns are worth his going home that evening...
 

Lone Eagle Woman

Veteran Member
Yes it only a matter of time that they the Feds now will be coming for our guns. And the result will be American Blood flowing in the streets. In My Opinion!
 

MC2006

Veteran Member
Turn Them Over: Feinstein Moves To Ban ALL Assault Rifles, High Capacity Magazines, and Pistol Grips
http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/turn-them-over-feinstein-moves-to-ban-all-assault-rifles-high-capacity-magazines-and-pistol-grips_11072012

The agenda no longer needs to be hidden from public view. With President Obama winning another term and democrats taking control of the Senate, the move to fundamentally change America from within has begun – with a vengeance.

We’re all aware of the restrictive gun laws in the State of California which require low capacity magazines for handguns, fixed magazines for “assault” rifles, and a whole lot of running around just to be granted the right to carry a concealed firearm.

Now, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), who has championed gun control in her state for decades and co-wrote the original assault weapons ban enacted by the federal government in the 1990′s, wishes to bring even more stringent federal mandates to the land of the free.

What is being proposed by Feinstein is the most significant attack on the second amendment in history.

It would essentially ban thousands of firearms and require gun owners to turn them over to the Federal government.

I don’t have the minutes of the meeting (yet), but sources tell me California Senator and longtime gun-hater Dianne Feinstein’s legal staff held meetings on Friday with FTB/ATF legal staff to discuss a new “Assault Weapons Ban” Madame Feinstein would be looking to push through Congress if President Obama wins reelection.

This same “pretty good intelligence” says the items that would lead to a ban would ban pistol grips and “high-capacity” magazines, eliminate any grandfathering and ban sales of “weapons in possession”.

I don’t know about you, but if these things come to pass and I’m “in possession” I’m certainly not selling.

In fact, the lack of interest in the idea surprised the California liberal’s legal staffers. Apparently, they believe no logical person could possible disagree with them.



I began receiving the first reports of increases in gun buying by people concerned about tomorrow’s election. Dealers in Oklahoma, Arkansas, Texas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama and Indiana all tell me there hasn’t been a huge number of buyers expressing those concerns, but the numbers were noticeable.

Among that group -and the majority of “regular” purchasers- the core driving most of the purchasing seem to be in their mid-to-late 30s. Again, home and personal defense are the most frequently cited reasons for buying.

Source: Shooting Wire

At a Congressional budget meeting in September of this year, Feinstein alluded to her desire to reintroduce federal assault weapons ban regulations similar to those she helped cosponsor and pass in 1994 during the Presidency of Bill Clinton:

“Ladies and gentlemen, it is time to say, once again, in legislation, weapons of war do not belong on our streets…”
September 5, 2012

It it any wonder that shares of stocks like Smith & Wesson and Ruger surged this morning in response to President Obama winning a second term? While the majority of stocks across the world are in the midst of a sell-off and economic conditions indicate the country is in a recession, America’s gun owners aren’t waiting to see what happens next.

Senator Feinstein is serious, and despite this most recent report appearing only as a rumor, her comments earlier this year and her actions two decades ago, should leave no question as to where this is headed.

They are coming for our guns; plain and simple.


My Lord... what an ugly, evil women
:kk1:
 

Attachments

Watchman2

Veteran Member
I did not lose my guns, I did not bury my guns. I will use them when the time comes. They are well oiled, locked and loaded.

Watchman2
 

Publius

TB Fanatic
She won't need too. She will use her cronies to give orders too fools who know nothing about gun rights.


They cannot read and comprehend the english language very well! Congress and senate cannot just pass such a law without going threw the constitutional amendment process and the bill must originate in congress, then it must be sent out to the legislature's of every state and they must agree (Ratify) and send their Collective Yea or Nay back to congress where each state vote is duly recorded by the house sergeant at arms and if enough states say yes it then it's called Ratified by the states and then moves on to become law of the land and the second amendment of the United States Constitution is then null and void without force or effect and the new law takes its place as law.
 

TXKajun

Veteran Member
They cannot read and comprehend the english language very well! Congress and senate cannot just pass such a law without going threw the constitutional amendment process and the bill must originate in congress, then it must be sent out to the legislature's of every state and they must agree (Ratify) and send their Collective Yea or Nay back to congress where each state vote is duly recorded by the house sergeant at arms and if enough states say yes it then it's called Ratified by the states and then moves on to become law of the land and the second amendment of the United States Constitution is then null and void without force or effect and the new law takes its place as law.
Uhh, haven't you been following Obama's Executive Orders which totally bypass Congress??

Kajun
 

Panner

Veteran Member
That's going to be our real problem with Obozo. He doesn't worry about Congress, he just makes an Executive Order and moves on. His deal is screw the Constitution! And soon he will have the Supreme Court stacked against us, so anything he does will be ruled legal.
 

Captbill

Veteran Member
That woman can surround herself with a contingent of SS officers with FULLY AUTOMATIC AR-15s at any given moment--So, she has them--but doesn't want you to even have the semi-auto version.

Just like a liberal.

Good luck with that.
 

Countrymouse

Country exile in the city
Feinstein’s rumored bill “would ban pistol grips and "high-capacity" magazines, eliminate any grandfathering and ban sales of ‘weapons in possession’" Shepherd writes.
So weapons ALREADY PRIVATELY OWNED and in possession would immediately become illegal?

And you couldn't even sell them?

You'd just have to turn them in?
 

Countrymouse

Country exile in the city
They cannot read and comprehend the english language very well! Congress and senate cannot just pass such a law without going threw the constitutional amendment process and the bill must originate in congress, then it must be sent out to the legislature's of every state and they must agree (Ratify) and send their Collective Yea or Nay back to congress where each state vote is duly recorded by the house sergeant at arms and if enough states say yes it then it's called Ratified by the states and then moves on to become law of the land and the second amendment of the United States Constitution is then null and void without force or effect and the new law takes its place as law.
Unless O just enacts it via Executive Order and says screw Congress and the Constitution........
 

Captbill

Veteran Member
Unless O just enacts it via Executive Order and says screw Congress and the Constitution........
I don't think that's valid--and here in Arizona---good luck with that!
 

Captbill

Veteran Member
Country I don't think his exec orders have been in direct violation of the Constitution--i.e., "Shall not be infringed" but I could be wrong.

Do you have a cite?
 

eXe

Techno Junkie
_______________
Ya know, I am sick to death of having to worry about MY RIGHTS every damn election. People get free crap, free abortions, free phones, free homes, and the ONLY thing I ask of my government is to leave my guns alone.

Ill tell you this. I wont be turning in a damn thing.. I am over it.
 

ready2go

Veteran Member
I am a one-issue voter. My litmus test for freedom is firearms because without which, there will be no freedom. I fear the day is coming, my badge will come off and I will die for what I believe. Hopefully I can get the rest of my agency to join Oathkeepers and make a stand.

The mere mention of Diane Feinstein and I vomit a little in my mouth.
 

Captbill

Veteran Member
Ya know, I am sick to death of having to worry about MY RIGHTS every damn election. People get free crap, free abortions, free phones, free homes, and the ONLY thing I ask of my government is to leave my guns alone.

Ill tell you this. I wont be turning in a damn thing.. I am over it.
:applaud::applaud::applaud::applaud:
 

Satanta

Stone Cold Crazy
_______________
I am a one-issue voter. My litmus test for freedom is firearms because without which, there will be no freedom. I fear the day is coming, my badge will come off and I will die for what I believe. Hopefully I can get the rest of my agency to join Oathkeepers and make a stand.

The mere mention of Diane Feinstein and I vomit a little in my mouth.
But how does your agecy talk now?

Usually, once in line-always in line and if they are worried about their pensions and such versus their feedoms do not except first-to convince then a d second-to make it out the door alive if it comes down to it in a SHTF scenario.

If they are walking in lock-step and you break ranks you will likely be eliminated.
 

Shinmen Takezo

Membership Revoked
No chance of this passing through the congress--not a chance at all.
For two years at least.

If the congress was smart (fat chance) they would begin unwinding all of President Chavez's --errrr, Seotoro's executive orders.
And this power they possess BTW... just by a majority vote. No input from the Senate. No input from the Thug-in-Chief.

ST
 

ready2go

Veteran Member
I don't know how they think but I do know that several of them are collectors of 'assault' rifles and are reloaders and avid recreational shooters. Two of them as well as myself, are preppers. If it comes down to it, pensions aren't going to matter anymore anyhow. I imagine by the time the shooting really starts, the 0's and 1's that are in the computer that make up the pensions will be wiped out anyways.
 

Countrymouse

Country exile in the city
Country I don't think his exec orders have been in direct violation of the Constitution--i.e., "Shall not be infringed" but I could be wrong.

Do you have a cite?
Maybe others can help me with the "cite", but do you remember when he "appointed" an entirely new "Department of Consumer something-or-other" while Congress was out on recess---creating an entirely new department of the Federal govt. out of thin air, which our taxes will have to support, that has AUTHORITY over American businesses---and did ALL this without ANY approval or even discussion of the matter by the U.S. Congress?

When they came back into town, they sort of mildly complained that "Now you aren't supposed to do things that way", but NO ONE actually stood up and said "This is unconstitutional, this new government agency has not been formed legitimately, and it cannot stand or function!"---no one had the cojones to do that.

Can others help me out here and give Captbill a "cite" on this?
 

Satanta

Stone Cold Crazy
_______________
No chance of this passing through the congress--not a chance at all.
For two years at least.

If the congress was smart (fat chance) they would begin unwinding all of President Chavez's --errrr, Seotoro's executive orders.
And this power they possess BTW... just by a majority vote. No input from the Senate. No input from the Thug-in-Chief.

ST
They won't as they are part of the problem.

otherwise a lot of it would never have happened or been resolved by now.
 

Quisling

Senior Member
Unless O just enacts it via Executive Order and says screw Congress and the Constitution........
By law, Congress can override any executive order within a certain time period after the President signs it. So, if that happens, Congress will also be culpable and complicit.
 

Captbill

Veteran Member
Country--I do know those---Bush did that too creating the new DHS. But none (I could be wrong) were contrary to the Constitution.

Also, recall, DC vs, Heller, Supreme court ruled fed .gov could not violate the 2nd amendment but states or localities could make local rules.

So I think a blanket EO could be problematic...and, as pointed out above, there is that (R) controlled house.
 
Top