Thursday - February 28, 2013

Turning On A Phrase

Democrats have begun an all-out push to move a new assault weapons ban through Congress. But it faces strong headwinds from House Republicans, Democrats in pro-gun rights states and many legislatures in western and southern states who are moving in a different direction to ease gun control, rather than strengthen it.

And of course the hearing was more full of totally imagined bullshit than a John Edwards lawsuit summation ...

The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by the bill’s author, Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, heard emotional testimony Wednesday from a witness list stacked with pro-ban speakers—none more powerful than Neil Heslin of Newtown, Conn., whose son Jesse, was killed in the elementary school massacre. He pointed to his forehead and told the hushed hearing panel about the bullet that struck just below Jesse’s hairline.

“Jesse looked at coward Adam Lanza in the eyes, saw his face and he looked at the end of that barrel, Jesse didn’t run, Jesse didn’t turn his back. That was the fatal shot that killed Jesse,” he said.

Really motherfucker? Really? Your 6 year old was heroic? Really? Because you yourself were there and witnessed this right? Oh wait, you weren’t. Not at all. No survivors in that classroom. So it’s just as likely that Lanza grabbed your hysterical pants-shitting kid by the face, put the muzzle against his forehead, and pulled the trigger. Sorry to be nasty like that, but your dribbly emotional scenario is complete bullshit, and you yourself are such a disgusting piece of shit that you’re willing to whore out the death of your own child to make some political hay. You sicken me more than just about any human being I’ve ever heard of.

Democrats are pushing for a new gun ban that would limit, among other things, 157 types of so-called assault weapons and magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. When asked if there is a constitutionally protected right for someone to own a gun with that kind of capacity to kill, John Walsh, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Colorado speaking on behalf of the Justice Department, said, “There clearly is room for reasonable regulation particularly of dangerous and unusual weapons.”

That phrase, “dangerous and unusual weapons,” is key to the Democrats’ strategy of seeking a new ban that withstands court challenges. In the Supreme Court’s Heller decision, which struck down the District of Columbia’s handgun ban, Justice Antonin Scalia referenced a 1939 U.S. Supreme Court decision that gave Second Amendment protection to weapons “in common use at the time” of its being written.

Scalia wrote, “We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’”

1) If our Supreme Court was not full of morons and pussies, they would have thrown out the 1939 Miller decision as part of the Heller decision for the flawed piece of junk that it was. Instead, our modern, cowardly, dickless court is even less brave than a father’s fantasy claim for a certain 6 year old: this court will split atoms to avoid making any decision that is one angstrom unit wider than the exact words in front of them. Miller was crap, if for no other reason than that the other side of the arguments were never heard, because Miller himself was already dead.

2) The Miller decision was about the 1934 National Firearms Act, another idiotic knee-jerk reactionary “we must act now!!” bill which put an extremely onerous tax on fully automatic weapons, thus reserving their use to the rich and powerful. It also banned short bodied rifles and shotguns, even though it allowed pistols of the same or smaller size to still exist. And that same 1934 Act banned “dangerous and unusual” firearms, like pen guns, guns built into pocket watches, wallet guns, belt buckle guns, guns built into hats, buns built into walking sticks, guns built into tire irons, etc. - firearms that were disguised as other things. I never really understood that one. Were gangsters running around robbing banks with lamps, vases, and couch cushions? “There’s a gun built into this, so give me all the money or I’ll blast you with this quart of milk!”

3) The Miller decision was made against Miller, who had argued that short shotguns were indeed of military value. The court of that day must have been full of lazy men who knew nothing of history or firearms, because short shotguns had been used by mounted cavalry for more than 100 years at that point, and short shotguns had been used defensively to great effect in the trenches of The Great War just 16 years prior to this case. So effectively that the Germans, who were only too happy to use poison gas and flame throwers against us, sued in international court to have shotguns banned as terror weapons. So Miller was 100% wrong because the blackrobes purposely ignored the facts that they could have found out about with only the most minimal effort.

But the important thing is what “dangerous and unusual” meant at the time. Oh to hell with it. Why should I waste my finger’s efforts writing about original intent when dealing with unhinged leftists? They don’t get it. The whole damn modern government is based on a deliberate misreading of the original intent of “regulate interstate commerce”. These gun control petty tyrants STILL claim that the Second Amendment is only about the militia, and the weapons hiding under it’s penumbra are 6 foot long muzzle loading muskets. Because most citizens are stupid lazy morons run by their emotions and their gonads, who can’t be bothered to read the reams and reams and reams of writing by the Founding Fathers - ALL OF THEM, not just evil slave-fucker Tommy JeffJeff - who wrote and wrote and wrote about what the whole “keep and bear arms” thing was all about, right on up to including “Their swords and every terrible implement of the soldier are the birthright of Americans.” That’s real original intent: all citizens to go about armed at all times. So obviously, I’m wasting my breath.

But Republicans argue that those weapons are hardly unusual if in the possession of millions of Americans. There are presently more than 4 million AR 15’s in American homes alone, and many more millions of excess-capacity magazines

Rather than create new laws that impinge on the Second Amendment, one Republicans asked why existing laws are not better enforced. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., asked Walsh how many people who had failed gun background checks had been referred to state prosecutions.

Walsh said, “Senator, I don’t have a particular number on that.”

Graham replied, using the most recent DOJ statistics. “Almost 80,000 people failed background checks and 44 people are prosecuted, what kind of deterrent is that?” he asked.

Republican Sen. Charles Grassley asked why a second assault weapons ban is needed, when a Justice Department study found the effects of the first ban to be inconclusive.

“They cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence,” he said.

Democrats will never let little things like facts get in the way of their emotionally charge rush to stampede your rights and freedoms. It’s too good a crisis to let go to waste, and they will use this to push Forward™ their anarcho-tyrannist agenda as much as they can. There is no foul deed nor disgusting and false display of piety or phony moral superiority that they will not make. Frankly, I am amazed that they haven’t brought the exhumed bodies of the Newtown victims out as display pieces. Or murdered other children and pretended they were Newtown victims. Because yes, they are that sick, that twisted, and that desperate.

PS - Hey Senator Graham: you’d better make sure that failing a NICS check is an actual crime before shooting your mouth off like that. And get your numbers right at both the initial and post appeals level. You know, little minor things like 69% of NICS denials are based on data asynchronicity, and those cases are approved on appeal, and about 12,000 other denials are not prosecuted because of executive orders on federal immigration policy.

PPS - even the Daily Kos understands that Miller was crap.

Posted by Drew458     on 02/28/2013 at 09:04 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Guns and Gun Control •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner