Saturday, July 28, 2012

Sneaky Dems Attempt Gun Control In CyberSecurity Bill

Reprinted from Freedom Outpost  (July 27, 2012)
by Tim Brown

Democrat Senators have offered an amendment to the cybersecurity bill that would limit the purchase of high capacity gun magazines. May I ask what in the world high capacity gun magazines have to do with cybersecurity? I already know. They have nothing to do with it, but this is how our Congress works.

However, with this particular amendment, S.A.2575, was sponsored by Democrats Frank Lautenberg (N.J.), Barbara Boxer (Calif.), Jack Reed (R.I.), Bob Menendez (N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Schumer and Dianne Feinstein (Calif.). These liberal Senators are looking to make it illegal to transfer or posses large capacity devices that feed guns more than 10 rounds with the exception of .22 caliber rim fire ammunition. Apparently you can have a thousand round drum of those on your weapon and you’re ok.

The amendment is identical to a different bill that was sponsored by Frank Lautenberg.

In the first place, the stupid thing about the law is that it would only affect these devices that were sold or transferred after the law took effect. So people they are afraid of can still legally own these, just as long as they got them before the law was in effect. That makes absolutely no sense.

Chuck Shumer, the New York Democrat, and yes this is the same New York that gave the country the likes of Mayor Michael Bloomberg, was pushing for passage of this amendment.

“Maybe we could come together on guns if each side gave some,” Schumer said.

Mr. Schumer seems oblivious that the only people that have compromised are Republicans and frankly they need to stop compromising. That’s what gets us into this mess in the first place. The gun control laws on the books are the result of Democrats calling for more gun control and Republicans caving to that demand. The more we compromise, the further left we drift.

I think we can find common ground. Stop making new gun control laws Mr. Schumer. The government has tens of thousands of gun laws on the books now and they don’t stop all the things you claim they will stop.

“The basic complaint is that the Chuck Schumers of the world want to take away your guns,” Schumer said of the argument made by gun lobbies. “I think it would be smart for those of us who want rational gun control to make it know that that’s not true at all.”

It is true. Liberals like Chuck Schumer think that by disarming the population they can get a better handle on crime and control the people. What they fail to see is that the very people they are out to stop do not adhere to their laws, which is why they are called criminals. That’s C-R-I-M-I-N-A-L-S. As Rush says, “For those in Rio Linda” that means they are guilty of a crime, which means they violate the law. They disregard it. They oppose the law. The law simply defines who the criminals are and in this case, with this amendment, people, such as myself, who would seek to purchase a magazine for their Glock, or 1911 or AR-15 that would have more than 10 rounds, would become a criminal. See how that works?

“We can debate where to draw the line of reasonableness, but we might be able to come to an agreement in the middle,” Schumer said. “Maybe, maybe, maybe we can pass some laws that might, might, might stop some of the unnecessary casualties … maybe there’s a way we can come together and try to break through the log jam and make sure the country is a better place.”

OK, there are a lot of ‘maybes’ and ‘mights’ in Schumer’s statements here. “Mights” and “Maybes” are what the left always use to try and push their agenda. There is never a definitive “this will work and here’s how.”This kind of argument is emotional, not logical. The only way this will “make the country a better place” is for people like Charles Schumer to stay out of the gun marketplace and allow Americans the ability to purchase a weapon of choice for whatever they intend to use it for, whether it is hunting or sport shooting or self defense.

While Schumer also decried assault weapons and said that average Americans didn’t need such a weapon to go hunting or protect themselves, he is not to determine such things. Tell that to the victims of the tyrannical government under Bill Clinton and Janet Reno that brought bloodshed in both Waco, TX and Ruby Ridge for no real reason or threat. Americans should be able to purchase whatever weapons are on the market. Laws are in place to make sure that legal transactions are checked thoroughly. Those criminals that are intent on getting high capacity magazines are going to do it despite Schumer and the Democrats passing a million laws and the law-abiding citizens are the ones that will pay for their stupidity.

This bill is set to be voted on next week.


Comments are invited!
Send feedback to:  WatchDog
.

4 comments:

7777Jill said...

If ‘Chunky Cheese’ Schumer, and others of his ilk, knew of what they speak; they would require that only the ‘jumbo’ magazines could be used.

The high capacity magazines are notorious for jamming.

In all probability, the massacre in Aurora CO. would have killed or wounded A greater number of people if the shooters ‘large-capacity’ magazine not jammed!

Jack said...

Obama will probably just issue another illegal executive order!@

Hellcat said...

Every time we have some lunatic commit a mass murder the liberals call for more gun control.

The root of the problem, in almost every case, is too much regulation.

The current laws would prohibit these mental cases from owning or processing firearms. That is if anyone knew that they were mental cases. But the liberals have made it all but impossible to report their condition from being revealed to third parties.

Therefore, they have a clear record when a background check is run.

James007 said...

What else would expect from a regime that stated that our own veterans were the most likely group to commit acts of terrorism?