View Single Post
Old November 9, 2012, 12:42 PM   #70
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
The above loses credibility right off the bat to me when they confuse NATO with the UN.

So you have two of the usual gun control suspects, doing what they usually do, and further discussion of a treaty that even if then UN got around to passing it would not be likely to be ratified by the senate.

Quote:
The Obama administration, she continued, has "a limitation on what they can do, but I'm hoping they'll look on the books and see what they can do. I think that's fair."
Quote:
any major reforms to gun laws will have to come through Congress. And McCarthy said that won't happen until lawmakers are ready to stand up to the NRA
McCarthy's own statements indicate she knows her rhetoric is all bark and no bite.

Quote:
McCarthy was one of just four lawmakers who held a press conference Tuesday urging action on gun control in response to the Colorado shootings.
Only 4 people used a critical incident to attempt to garner favor for gun control, on top of which 51 of our senators openly opposed the UN arms trade treaty. None of these numbers have changed significantly since the elections.

As for Feinstein specifically

Quote:
Feinstein’s rumored bill “would ban pistol grips and "high-capacity" magazines, eliminate any grandfathering and ban sales of ‘weapons in possession’" Shepherd writes
Any solid evidence yet? I don't doubt she's working on something, but it's jumping the gun when it's all based on rumor.

Quote:
"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.
All the huff and puff then a statement that again indicates it's all bluster. The real players aren't even mentioned in the rumors.

Articles like these do nothing but to stir the pot with shoddy information. Responding to actual threats to the 2A is one thing, but filling peoples minds with speculation, and unverified and unsupported, information causes confusion and is not helpful in supporting our rights.
sigcurious is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04793 seconds with 7 queries