Feinstein : 'I Don't Know' of a Gun Law That Could Have Stopped Las Vegas Shooting

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

Post Reply
User avatar

Topic author
AndyC
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 9843
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 12:34 pm
Location: Richardson, TX

Feinstein : 'I Don't Know' of a Gun Law That Could Have Stopped Las Vegas Shooting

#1

Post by AndyC » Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:52 pm

Remember Kitty Genovese

Image

Amateurs skip safety-checks - pros don't.
Preferred Travel Agent - 72 Virgins Dating Club
There's nothing quite like the offer of 230 grains to a man's chest to remind him of his manners

User avatar

spectre
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:44 am

Re: Feinstein : 'I Don't Know' of a Gun Law That Could Have Stopped Las Vegas Shooting

#2

Post by spectre » Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:03 pm

Gun laws are not designed to prevent bad guys from shooting innocent civilians.

Gun laws are designed to prevent good guys from shooting criminals, tyrants, and other bad hombres.
When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society,
over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it
and a moral code that glorifies it. - Frédéric Bastiat


sig-sog
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri May 22, 2015 3:40 pm
Location: DFW

Re: Feinstein : 'I Don't Know' of a Gun Law That Could Have Stopped Las Vegas Shooting

#3

Post by sig-sog » Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:17 pm

So why not repeal them all then? Seriously.

User avatar

C-dub
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 12063
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: DFW

Re: Feinstein : 'I Don't Know' of a Gun Law That Could Have Stopped Las Vegas Shooting

#4

Post by C-dub » Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:23 pm

Listening to that I heard her say something that I'm curious about. She says that the SCOTUS has determined that possession of machine guns are not covered by the 2A. I don't think that is true. I think what was done was that the SCOTUS said that they could be regulated or something like that, but don't think there is anything in the 2A that prohibits machine guns. Am I wrong?
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016.

NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member


Papa_Tiger
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 481
Joined: Fri May 24, 2013 9:55 am

Re: Feinstein : 'I Don't Know' of a Gun Law That Could Have Stopped Las Vegas Shooting

#5

Post by Papa_Tiger » Mon Oct 09, 2017 7:45 am

"I don't know of a gun law that could have stopped the Las Vegas shooting, but that won't stop me from trying to come up with something to further my agenda of banning private ownership of anything that can hurl a projectile at another individual."


bblhd672
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 3733
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 10:43 am
Location: TX

Re: Feinstein : 'I Don't Know' of a Gun Law That Could Have Stopped Las Vegas Shooting

#6

Post by bblhd672 » Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:05 pm

AndyC wrote:Just posting this for future use:

https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/ ... 5414723790
She's lying, she knows exactly which gun law they believe will prevent events like these - abolition of the 2nd Amendment and total confiscation of all firearms in the hands of the common man.


wil
Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 2:37 pm

Re: Feinstein : 'I Don't Know' of a Gun Law That Could Have Stopped Las Vegas Shooting

#7

Post by wil » Mon Oct 09, 2017 4:29 pm

C-dub wrote:Listening to that I heard her say something that I'm curious about. She says that the SCOTUS has determined that possession of machine guns are not covered by the 2A. I don't think that is true. I think what was done was that the SCOTUS said that they could be regulated or something like that, but don't think there is anything in the 2A that prohibits machine guns. Am I wrong?
Nothing in the 2nd specifies restrictions on any given weapon, it is why it says "....arms." that is plural meaning more than one. In this instance it means more than one type.

The argument presented in the miller case falsely claimed a saw-off shotgun was not a militia weapon, specifically a weapon being used or to be used in a military capacity, therefore not protected by the 2nd amendment.

I do not believe any given weapon has to be military oriented to be 'protected' by the 2nd, it says "....arms" again, plural and non-specific, not "arms generally associated with militia or military oriented ability"

Along with that, if we are to take that argument at face value, then damn near every single weapon now effectively removed from civilian ownership due to the cost involved via the NFA and other illegal legislation, should be non-restricted under the NFA.

if it is weapon which is required to be military service oriented, then all belt-fed, select fire, and RPG & bazookas should be unrestricted for purchase & ownership via the NFA. As all of those weapons are militia or military service oriented and/or in current use.

under the miller argument, taking it at face value, a bow & arrow, spears, swords, and slingshots, should be the items restricted or taxed under the NFA as they are not weapons oriented towards militia service or military use. They are all weapons however they are not oriented towards militia or citizen military use/service, therefore they are what should be subject to the $200 tax and registry.


Soccerdad1995
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 3440
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm

Re: Feinstein : 'I Don't Know' of a Gun Law That Could Have Stopped Las Vegas Shooting

#8

Post by Soccerdad1995 » Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:50 pm

wil wrote:
C-dub wrote:Listening to that I heard her say something that I'm curious about. She says that the SCOTUS has determined that possession of machine guns are not covered by the 2A. I don't think that is true. I think what was done was that the SCOTUS said that they could be regulated or something like that, but don't think there is anything in the 2A that prohibits machine guns. Am I wrong?
Nothing in the 2nd specifies restrictions on any given weapon, it is why it says "....arms." that is plural meaning more than one. In this instance it means more than one type.

The argument presented in the miller case falsely claimed a saw-off shotgun was not a militia weapon, specifically a weapon being used or to be used in a military capacity, therefore not protected by the 2nd amendment.

I do not believe any given weapon has to be military oriented to be 'protected' by the 2nd, it says "....arms" again, plural and non-specific, not "arms generally associated with militia or military oriented ability"

Along with that, if we are to take that argument at face value, then darn near every single weapon now effectively removed from civilian ownership due to the cost involved via the NFA and other illegal legislation, should be non-restricted under the NFA.

if it is weapon which is required to be military service oriented, then all belt-fed, select fire, and RPG & bazookas should be unrestricted for purchase & ownership via the NFA. As all of those weapons are militia or military service oriented and/or in current use.

under the miller argument, taking it at face value, a bow & arrow, spears, swords, and slingshots, should be the items restricted or taxed under the NFA as they are not weapons oriented towards militia service or military use. They are all weapons however they are not oriented towards militia or citizen military use/service, therefore they are what should be subject to the $200 tax and registry.
I would be willing to trade my revolvers, hunting rifles, .22LR and BB guns for a few rocket launchers, land mines, etc. Maybe partial ownership interest in a tank.
Ding dong, the witch is dead

User avatar

Captain Matt
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 1:43 pm
Location: blue water

Re: Feinstein : 'I Don't Know' of a Gun Law That Could Have Stopped Las Vegas Shooting

#9

Post by Captain Matt » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:58 pm

"shall not be infringed" :patriot:

If nothing else, this tragedy has brought a few more domestic enemies out of the closet.
"hic sunt dracones"

Post Reply

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”