|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Dianne Feinstein Comments on No Guns for Terrorists Vote
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://keepandbeararms.com
|
There
are 3 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Senator Dianne Feinstein yesterday spoke at a press conference following the vote on her amendment to give the attorney general the authority to block the sale of guns to known or suspected terrorists.
Her remarks follow:
“Well, here we go again. Another mass shooting—this time the largest in history. Forty-nine dead, 53 injured. Another chance for Congress to take meaningful action. Another missed opportunity.
|
Comment by:
mickey
(6/22/2016)
|
There you have it, folks.
An open admission that she views high profile killings as opportunities to enact gun control. |
Comment by:
lbauer
(6/22/2016)
|
Feinstein cannot be so clueless that she does not know that none of the proposed gun control laws would have done anything meaningful to prevent terrorists from obtaining weapons. She has a long standing record opposing private ownership of firearms. For everyone except herself, her friends, and their bodyguards of course. It really is sickening how these rabid gun control fanatics try to take advantage of yet another tragedy to sell the public on their failed agenda. |
Comment by:
stevelync
(6/22/2016)
|
Too bad that bloodline didn't end in an eastern European oven. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|