Skip to comments.SCHAKOWSKY: ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN 'JUST THE BEGINNING'
Posted on 03/11/2013 2:24:52 PM PDT by NoRedTape
"Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), a member of the Democratic Partys leadership in the House of Representatives, suggested to Jason Mattera at a Feb. 13 womens rights rally that plans for an assault weapons ban and private-sales background checks were only the beginning of a broader gun control agenda extending to handguns as well."..............
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Is this a gutterwhore alert?
But they said they wouldn’t seize guns from innocent, law-abiding, non-violent citizens.
Simple: pass a law making all gun-ownership illegal -- then they can claim that they aren't persecuting the law-abiding, but the law breaking.
It's really easy to see what they're thinking.
They SAY abortion should be legal and RARE:
Why not take them at their word...? What is the mechanism for ENSURING that it is, indeed, rare...?
Shouldn’t confidential records (similar to form 4473) be kept and periodically POLICED, the better to ensure that abortion is not abused as a form of contraception..?
Why not take them at their word...?
They’re not EXTREMISTS, right..? This would be to assure the QUALITY of abortion, and to make sure it is RARE.
They’re not EXTREMISTS, right? Or ARE they...?
Surely they won’t reject this ONE LITTLE measure..?
They are showing thier hand once again, take notice!
What Good Can a Handgun Do Against An Army?
This didn’t turn out well for the British in 1776...and I don’t think it will for the Libs in the present day.
More truth is leaking out from the Communists. I wonder if Canada would take Illinois in a trade for Alberta?
In order to assure women’s reproductive health, we should have REPRODUCTIVE POLICE:
They’ll be armed and badged. They’ll coordinate with clinics to assure clean and safe facilities; they’ll HELP them.
Like big, ole PALS.
Now, they’re won’t be dynamic entries and body-slams, good Lord, no...!
Not at first, anyway. Not for a really long time —probably.
“Bureau of Anesthetic, Tongs, and Fallopian tubes”; Safeguarding Womens’ Reproductive Rights.
This would all be before quizzes for abortion cards, abortion waiting periods, and raids on Junk Abortion Providers.
And who in the world has just one little handgun (of course, I lost all my weapons in that unfortunate boating accident).
Just in case you wanted to become a tanker....
Being poor, I have only one inexpensive 9mm handgun and 58 rounds. Used to have a nice Winchester shotgun and Marlin .22 rifle with plenty of ammo but the first wife compelled me to sell them at a loss with kids in the house.
I am a peaceable citizen.
democrats unwittingly turning up the heat under the simmering pots they are already standing in saying, “Come on in. The water’s fine.”
Good, sez I. Lett’em.
Come and get them.
“SCHAKOWSKY: ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN ‘JUST THE BEGINNING’”
Yeah sweetheart, the beginning of the end for you and your liberal goonfriends.
Making guns illegal for criminals doesn’t stop criminals. What makes you think law-abiding patriots in the country won’t go underground and do the same? You know, like carrying boxes of SAM’s and other goodies over the same fast-n-furious border you and your colleagues are so desperate to keep wide open?
Everyone else will be Federal felons and probably suspect of being a domestic terrorist. Avoid coffee shops.
SCHAKOWSKY: ASSAULT WEAPONSFixed it The Assault Weapon Scam is just a means to ban ALL guns.
BANSCAM 'JUST THE BEGINNING'
Its just the Pro-Tyranny Lefts way of destroying a Constitutional right by simply re-labeling the object of that right as some thing else something that can be demonized and destroyed.
Another prime example would be the terms Hate Speech, High Capacity or Military Style.
Ask Pro-Tyranny Leftists to define these arbitrary terms they will be incapable of giving you an exact answer because there is none.
Ask Pro-Tyranny Leftists to spell out the differences between the deliberately vague term Assault Weapon and what is protected by the God-given and Constitutionally right to keep and bear arms and youll roll snake eyes on that on as well.
Fact is, the Pro-Tyranny Left cannot specify what these phrases mean because they are deliberately indefinable.
[unless you use the phrase Shoulder thing that goes up, - thats the exception /sarc.]
Love your screen name ping.
More ammo against those who try to tell us “No one is coming after your guns”.
There is no shame in being poor. It is a badge of honor to handle poverty with dignity.
The Libs are pushing for confiscation, but confiscation brings war...and, except for Obama and his class war, war is not exactly what the Libs are prepared for.
The Libs (even Alinsky) are agents of social change, not military change.
But when they force their social change, they create a vacuum...a vacuum that might be filled with force by their opponents.
Alinsky was great at waging war against civil society...he was not so great at waging war against the militant forces that would oppose him.
Alinsky and Obama have misjudged us. They have framed us against a 1960's peace-nik background.
We are no longer in the 1960's.
We know peace is not the answer.
We are ready to fight for the country our forefathers created and died creating.
Obama and Soros are not Americans...they do not understand our ethos.
But they are about to get a good lesson in it.;-)
Latin for "from a thing done afterward." Ex post facto is most typically used to refer to a criminal law that applies retroactively, thereby criminalizing conduct that was legal when originally performed. Two clauses in the US Constitution prohibit ex post facto laws: Art 1, § 9 and Art. 1 § 10. see, e.g. Collins v. Youngblood, 497 US 37 (1990) and California Dep't of Corrections v. Morales, 514 US 499 (1995).
Liability insurance definitely won’t cover damage from an anititank round.
It's an interesting thing, Ex Post Facto laws are prohibited to both the federal government and the States.
It could [and likely will] be argued that the passing of new laws (like illegalizing guns) WITHOUT a retroactive element is not Ex Post Facto; indeed, I would agree. They (gun-banners) needn't worry about Ex Post Pacto prohibitions in the Constitution if they do not get greedy and try to make preceding gun-ownership illegal.
But then again, the 2nd is quite explicit on not infringing the right, and yet we have the GCA and NFA both.
The Communist from Evanston strikes again. Doesn’t she have a husband who’s convicted of a felony?
And millions of Americans loading up and prepping up is just the beginning, too. People are not buying because they think there will be bans, they are loading up because they think they’ll need the weapons.
Cheers and ping back at ya!
My mother once told me, “If you can’t say something nice about someone, he must be a pinko commie bastard.”
10. Always keep your gun pointed in a safe direction, such as at a hippie or communist.
That one’s a keeper! Thanks.