I'll Take That Gun Sir, oh here are your cigarettes

[ajh60]

The one argument I don't understand in the gun debate is that of those who want to save people from accidents or injury.I understand they are horrible and sad. (I had a cousin shot and killed during a robbery I understand the violence) However Cigarettes kill more, automobiles kill more, Alcohol Kills more and creates alot of family violence. I am not suggesting doing away with any one more than the other however guns seem like (excuse the pun)an easy target.

If I register my handgun, pass a security background check, that is what the law asks. I do not understand the problem.

[RC]

1. Guns were designed to kill things. The other things you listed were not designed to kill.

Think that may have a bearing?

[ajh60]

9. So then

it is not the deaths that really matter, but how the deaths occur? My point is that for most folks that is true. It is because they are guns. They are not looking out for the well being of anyone. My other point is that they are legal and if one wishes to own one, they have the right. I do think both sides have a point in this debate, I don't believe that it is, as more most issue's. a one or the other.

[JonQ]

18. Cigarettes aren't designed to kill?

They're just a way to imbibe nicotine, a compound plants evolved as an organic poison to keep animals away from them. Not only is it intended to kill, but it may help kill those around you. I can posses a gun in a room of people and not directly affect any of them, can you do the same with a lit cigarette?

The only differences I see are 1) guns have an upside (preventing crimes) 2) guns aren't chemically addictive and 3) guns kill a trivial number of people compared to cigarettes.

Seems like a ban on tobacco ought to precede a ban on handguns, logically.

[Karl_Bonner_1982]

37. I'm surprised it hasn't already happened

You'd think by now at least one state would have flirted with an outright tobacco ban, maybe California? Which other states are strongly anti-tobacco?

[katandmoon]

2. Oh PLEASE - NOBODY is trying to take your goddamn gun except in your paranoid mind

[Tejas]

3. um, yeah

Thank you for your informed post :sarcasm:

[iverglas]

4. oooh, last time somebody pulled this shit

I ended up getting proposed to. Maybe we can do that again.

So. What does your picture say there, Tejas?

1000 words, or 25, whatever you like.

[AtheistCrusader]

5. "Poor trigger discipline" N/t

[iverglas]

6. nope, bzzt

This thread ain't about trigger discipline.

[AtheistCrusader]

10. You asked what the picture 'said'

not what relevance it had to Katandmoon's post. :shrug:

[iverglas]

11. well, I guess we'll just all have to ask

what relevance it had to the post. I think Tejas probably knows that's what I was asking ... he just ain't sayin'.

[AtheistCrusader]

20. Tejas will have to answer,

since I do not know if he owns a civilian, semi-automatic AK-47 with a folding stock.

I do, so the assertion would have applied to me. (though mine has darker furniture)
Though, technically, the law she was actually promoting would have only applied to new importation, manufacture and sale, and only her personal side commentary applied to existing, owned hardware.

[Irreverend IX]

7. It's Iverglas, the gun safety expert!

If it's so safe to point a gun at people with your finger on the trigger when you're absolutely positively SURE it isn't loaded, why does every firearms training course say to never do it?

[iverglas]

8. nah, it's iverglas, goddess of truth and beauty

and plain old ordinary elementary school graduate -- the one who can read a post and grasp the subject matter.

Which, in this case, is not firearms safety.

Firearms safety being not, I have no doubt at all, the intended subject of Tejas's cryptic posting, either.

So much as I luv my fan club, if you guys can't get it together to (a) speak to the subject at hand, or (b) make me an offer I can't refuse, there'll be no autographed photos today.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

23. Oooh, oooh , oooh

An autographed picture of Iverglas and a howitzer in the same week, not in my wildest dreams.

David

[Caliman73]

13. Should be fairly obvious

Tejas was just showing katandmoon a picture of someone who is trying to ban guns. That someone just happened to supply the world a picture of EXACTLY what not to do with ANY firearm. As stated by some of the others: Treat all firearms as if they are loaded at all times. NEVER put your finger on the trigger until you are absolutely ready to shoot, and NEVER point the barrel at anything you are not ready to destroy.

Those are rules that the vast majority of law abiding firearms owners live by and take very seriously. The picture serves 2 purposes. 1) to clearly identify someone who has made it her goal to ban firearms from citizens even though she used to carry one, and stands with bodyguards who are willing to kill for her. 2)To illustrate that though firearms have the potential to be deadly, they are not deadly unless they are in the hands of someone who is, through malice (criminal) or stupidity (anti-gun senator pictured) behaving in a way as to make the firearm a deadly weapon. Kind of like a car. Under the control of a responsible driver, the car is not likely to be dangerous. Under the control of say a drunk senator it may become the vehicle for the demise of some poor young woman.

[iverglas]

14. you'd think, wouldn't you?

Tejas was just showing katandmoon a picture of someone who is trying to ban guns.

And yet, that statement is just so ... ambiguous.

Will no one spit out the mealies and speak clearly?

Here's the script to follow, for anyone who chooses not to; start at this post, and follow it on down.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=168639&mesg_id=168664

I luvs a trip down a memory lane. Particularly that one.

[AtheistCrusader]

19. What the hell...

Why didn't anyone just answer you? She was talking about banning what Congress has classified as 'Assault Weapons'. Not 'all guns'.

[iverglas]

21. so where were you when I needed you, eh?

;)

I think we know why nobody just answered me.

Which would be pretty much why radio silence has descended in Tejas's vicinity here.

But if somebody had just answered me ... well, to be continued!

[Tejas]

27. correct

Tejas was just showing katandmoon a picture of someone who is trying to ban guns.

Maybe katandmoon thinks Feinstein's mind has changed on gun-grabbing. Then again, katandmoon might never have heard of Feinstein or the rest of the over-the-hill gang of gungrabbers. Such would indeed be possible as most (if not all) antis simply read the lies by Brady et al and run with them as fact.

"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an out-right 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."
CBS-TV's "60 Minutes", February 5, 1995.



;)

[AtheistCrusader]

30. Why do you keep robbing that quote of it's context?

She is talking about 'Assault Weapons'. Not all guns. Would you use the same quote in this way if it actually contained the phrase 'assault weapons'?

Whether or not assault weapons are acutally a problem is a separate discussion. You could similarly throw up a picture of the Governor of California, for supporting the .50 caliber rifle ban in that state. He wanted to ban a particular class or type of gun. Yes, it's a silly, arbitrary weapon to choose, but it's a limited scope, not all guns.

[Tejas]

31. If you can do better,

then by all means feel free. I'd be more than happy to see it all.

What I posted is all I could find, quit trying after 8 pages of Google. Youtube had nothing. I even looked at the official page with her stances on numerous issues and also followed the links, nothing there either.

feinstein + guns + quote

feinstein + guns + quotes

feinstein + ban + quote

feinstein + guns + ban


Go for it, I spent 20 minutes searching, you want more than that it'll cost you ammo or mags.

[AtheistCrusader]

32. I'm not sure what you are asking for..

The full original context of the quote, or a better quote wherein she targets ALL guns?

[Tejas]

33. I didn't ask for anything

Was simply answering your charge on the "out of context" issue you brought up.

[gorfle]

28. What the picture says.

What the picture says to me is here we have a gun grabber who doesn't know anything about what they want to ban.

[virginia mountainman]

12. Lets see, how many firearm safety rules did she just violate..

According to Lt Col. Jeff Cooper

She broke ALL of them...ROFLMAO

1. All guns are always loaded.
2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
4. Always be sure of your target.


—Jeff Cooper

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_safety#Gun_safety_rules_and_mindset

[iverglas]

15. let's see ...

Who the fuck cares?

Damn there's a lot of diversionary grooming going on here today.

[virginia mountainman]

16. Well for someone who...

Wants to ban guns.

Why don't YOU, give a shit, when one is so poorly handled as to cause danger to bystanders???

[iverglas]

17. and what about those starving children in Darfur?

Shame on you for having nothing to say about that.

[virginia mountainman]

24. Who said I have nothing to say about them???

You never asked...

[aikoaiko]

35. A picture that will haunt this party for a long time.

I know I'm late for this party but here I am.

Yes, that picture is a reminder to all those who say, "no one is trying to take your guns away" that some politicians have tried to ban some guns (sometimes specific guns, sometimes classes of guns with certain accessories). Occasionally, we see some politicians try to reauthorize such bans.

The quote, "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 them all in -- I would have done it." is directed at the evil look "assault weapon", but it is clear example of someone who like to take away my guns (yes, I own firearms listed by name and configuration as Feinsteinian "assault weapons") and successfully enacted law that prevented me from acquiring them between the years of 1994 an 2004.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

22. That's a rational response.

NOT.

[benEzra]

25. So, no one in the country is trying to ban handguns or "assault weapons", eh?

Methinks you might want to let Alberto Gonzales, Dianne Feinstein, and Carolyn McCarthy know. They apparently haven't gotten the word yet.

[virginia mountainman]

26. BULLSHIT, I guess these Representatives, did not get the memo...

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1022

HR 1022

Sponsor

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy

Cosponsors

Rep. Neil Abercrombie
Rep. Gary Ackerman
Rep. Howard Berman
Rep. Earl Blumenauer
Rep. Robert Brady
Rep. Lois Capps
Rep. Yvette Clarke
Rep. William Clay
Rep. Joseph Crowley
Rep. Diana DeGette
Rep. William Delahunt
Rep. Rahm Emanuel
Rep. Anna Eshoo
Rep. Sam Farr
Rep. Chaka Fattah
Rep. Bob Filner
Rep. Barney Frank
Rep. Raul Grijalva
Rep. Jane Harman
Rep. Alcee Hastings
Rep. Mazie Hirono
Rep. Rush Holt
Rep. Michael Honda
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee
Rep. Henry Johnson
Rep. Patrick Kennedy
Rep. Dennis Kucinich
Rep. James Langevin
Rep. Barbara Lee
Rep. Zoe Lofgren
Rep. Nita Lowey
Rep. Carolyn Maloney
Rep. Edward Markey
Rep. Betty McCollum
Rep. James McGovern
Rep. Martin Meehan
Rep. Kendrick Meek
Rep. Bradley Miller
Rep. James Moran
Rep. Patrick Murphy
Rep. Jerrold Nadler
Del. Eleanor Norton
Rep. John Olver
Rep. William Pascrell
Rep. Edward Pastor
Rep. David Price
Rep. Steven Rothman
Rep. Janice Schakowsky
Rep. Adam Schiff
Rep. Allyson Schwartz
Rep. Joe Sestak
Rep. Brad Sherman
Rep. Albio Sires
Rep. Louise Slaughter
Rep. Hilda Solis
Rep. Ellen Tauscher
Rep. John Tierney
Rep. Niki Tsongas
Rep. Christopher Van Hollen
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Rep. Diane Watson
Rep. Melvin Watt
Rep. Henry Waxman
Rep. Robert Wexler
Rep. Lynn Woolsey
Rep. Albert Wynn

[slackmaster]

29. We come in peace

[iverglas]

36. hey

Remember

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=56667&mesg_id=57653

?

Check out

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/08/10/explosion-residents.html?ref=rss

http://www.cbc.ca/photogallery/canada/1464/

[Tejas]

34. Not only do more die because of vices etc,

but the financial costs to the community due to medical treatment resulting from these vices (lung cancer etc) far outweigh the financial costs of gun deaths/accidents to the community.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

38. Stay away from my cigars and my guns.