Leahy dismisses Fienstien Bill http://api.viglink.com/api/click?fo...weapons-ban/&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13596642570064
It was a silly bill. It banned the production of guns that haven't been manufactured since 1989 (some fairly unpopular long barreled semi-auto "pistols").
Sweet, I still have time to buy 25 round magazines for my 1911 .45 o.0 Boy wouldnt it be a travesty to not have that...o.0
To be fair, this doesn't technically kill the bill, but it certainly does make it blindingly clear that it has no chance to survive. If there was any doubt to begin with, that is. This was a terrible bill on any imaginable level. I knew it never had the slightest chance of passing, but I have to admit I did think it would at least get a little bit of traction. So. Now we start over. Which Senator will be next up to the plate, and what will they have to offer? What (if anything) will they learn from Feinstein's embarrassing debacle? Does this create an opportunity for someone to introduce some common sense to the discussion, some genuinely practical solutions? Something that actually addresses the substantive issues, rather than banning consumer rocket launchers and other weapons that don't even exist?
I would still like to get that rocket launcher under my 1911 how much of a Bad A's would I be with that -,-
I was excited when Feinstein tried to ban rocket launchers, because I thought that meant someone was going to invent one soon. And I figured a 1911 with a rocket launcher would make a perfect carry weapon. Because I live in Minnesota, and we wear really big jackets much of the year.
I can walk around with a long gun on me as long as I dont look suspect. and even as gruff as I look I dont look like your "gang bangin wannabe tough guy" So I could probably get away holding a 1911 w/rocket launcher attachment and Scope on it. lol
honestly I couldnt use a gernade launcher on a 1911 but this still is very cool to me. Full auto 1911 Edit this in Gotta admite this is pretty cool
Of course this bill had no chance of passage to begin with. It was written to satisfy Fienstien's supporters who were running in circles shouting, "Do something!" after the Sandy Hook shooting. She did something: Introduced a bill that made her appear to be doing something but had no chance of passing or of accomplishing anything if it did pass. So, Fienstien made some political points, nothing was accomplished, and everyone went home happy, even the NRA supporters who now have one more "crazy liberal" to point at, and no more gun restrictions as a result. It was a win - win for everyone.
I knew it didn't have a chance in hell to pass, but I was afraid that it would at least be the starting point for some horsetrading that would result in some sort of really bad gun-banning bill being passed along - not as ludicrous and draconian as Fienstein's travesty, but still something that would seriously infringe on the 2nd Amendment while not doing anything of substance to address the genuine issues. I wasn't expecting it to fail completely; that comes as a very pleasant surprise. I wonder if it really was a win-win, though. No matter what side of the debate you come down on, there's no question that the issue of gun violence has become a very serious and very divisive topic in our country. And it's going to remain so for some time. This is a subject that's going to be discussed and debated passionately all across the United States for months and years to come, and the more people like Feinstein muddy the waters with this kind of ridiculous, polarizing political posturing, the harder it's going to be for serious people to cut through the crap and have serious discussions. One way or another, we're going to have a national dialogue on this, and this kind of political theatre just creates an atmosphere that makes that more and more difficult, in my opinion. If the sane people are going to have a serious conversation, we need to keep the idiots out of the room so we can get down to serious business. People like Feinstein may be doing a lot more harm than good.
