Gun control tacked onto Cyber Security bill

Just a heads up.  It is from the usual suspects, Schumer, Lautenberg, Boxer, and Feinstein.

And when somebody tells you that the democrats aren’t in favor of gun control anymore, and it is a dead issue, and it is just silly to think that Obama wants to take your guns, blah blah friggin’ blah, laugh in their face. Because if the democrats are willing to push a magazine ban 4 months before the election, you know damn good and well what they are will be willing to do when Obama is in his second term.

Meanwhile, call your congressman and tell them to block this crap.

Found a Writing Excuses video of me
The Burning Throne, Episode 38: In the Shadow of a Pale Oak

38 thoughts on “Gun control tacked onto Cyber Security bill”

  1. NRA ILA link to contact congresscritters. Go for your Senator something fierce…yet polite. It goes double if he/she is up for re-election

  2. Why haven’t the people demanded ear marks, or paper clipping or whatever. Why haven’t people risen up and made it illegal. It’s disgusting! Why not have someone propose the “puppy dogs are awesome bill” then tack on “paper clipping is illegal” who would vote to say puppy dogs aren’t awesome!

  3. I would also like to point out that the Colorado shooter failed to kill more people BECAUSE he was using a higher capacity magazine. His weapon jammed. He didn’t know squat about S.P.O.R.T.S. and he had to change guns. 10 round magazines and learning how to do a rapid reload can do as much damage as using a higher capacity magazine.

  4. You aren’t going to be able to get rid of earmarks.

    The person who wants one hands a note to the committee head, and he puts it in the bill under his own name. Any congressman can introduce an amendment to a bill, or can do such for a different congressman. The committee head is simply doing this for any congressman in his own party who hands him such a note.

    Forbidding congresscritters from talking to each other is just silly.

    1. I take my statement back.

      The New Hampshire legislature has a system that actually works.

      New legislation must be introduced a year in advance in writing, and must be on one subject only. No blood dancing in recent tragedy is possible here.

      Any single legislator can block a later amendment if it is not on topic for the bill.

  5. Oh, and those CA and NY dems will ALWAYS introduce gun control bills. They are from totally safe Dem districts, and cannot be removed for doing this.

    What is different this time is that they had a chance to dance in the blood of the Aurora CO victims first, so we will need to make it clear that anyone else that pees on that third rail can and will burst into flames.

  6. fact, people have swamped authorities and classes for weapons permits and gun sales have soarded since this terrible tradgedy. perpetrators of these crimes do not follow gun control laws, were there several people present the guy would have been shot, saving about 65 or 70 victims and thereafter people contemplating such acts would not do it knowing people will shoot him back

  7. No worries, NRA-endorsed Harry Reid (gack) will take care of it. /sarc

    That said, all of the gun news of the day have pushed my wife off the fence and into the “learn to shoot, maybe even carry” camp. Any recommendations on a good starter handgun for the 5-10 love of my life?

    1. Try a Ruger SP-101 with a Crimson Trace grip. The lady can start with 148-grain wadcutters, progress through .38″ Spl with a normal powder charge, then to .38″ Spl +P, finally to .357″ Mag.

      Further, an expedient I use when the landlord permits, in the basement of the building: Take spent cases no longer fit for reloading with powder, decap and re-prime them, push them through a block of canning paraffin. Target is a black silhouette painted on the back wall of the basement. Use paint that will stay when you scrape the paraffin off. Range is four meters. Yes, it can be noisy.

      1. A Smith M&P or a Glock with a NY trigger would do just as well. If a cop who only fires a box of ammo a year can handle one, then your wife can as well.

        +1 on the laser sight.

      2. Call me a pessimist — I am one — but I suggest that the dependency of semi- and automatic weapons on ammunition regularity would be a detriment in the event of serious social unrest or disorganization. Mechanical weapons — revolvers, turnbolt or lever-action rifles, and the inimitable slide trombone (ready to blow a sour note in a lowlife’s life) — are much more forgiving of variation in ammunition quality from one round to the next, than are semis and spray-guns. Finally, it is easier to recover spent cases for reloading with a mechanical weapon.

        Adding paranoia to pessimism, I wish to call people’s attention to a short novel or long short story, entitled Iron Angel which postulated that the Soviets had developed and released a biological agent which attack petroleum and its by-products. I ask whether it is possible to create a chemical or biological agent tailored to attack the plastic in plastic-framed or plastic-stocked firearms?

      3. I don’t like the NY-1 trigger. Feels like my finger is being struck with a hammer when it resets. I would have no problem with the M&P or the SP-101 though. Try the Ruger in a 3 inch barrel.

      4. The S&W M&P is a six-shot K-frame. (Yes, I acknowledge I am being Socratically obtuse here. I have no use at all for any plastic-frame centerfire handgun until someone develops the “Ordine plastic” of The Weapon Shops of Isher, and even then I would still prefer a steel frame.) If one insists on the sixth shot, versus the SP-101’s five, try the Colt Magnum Carry; it is smaller than even a two-inch S&W K-frame.

      5. Contrary to Kristopher’s sarcasm, I believe that plastic frames for centerfire handguns are not an improvement, but rather a wrong turn into a cul-de-sac accelerated by the fashion effect (i.e.: It’s “cutting edge” so I gotta have it too).

      6. Seconded. Always start with a revolver. The basic skills are universal and the design is more forgiving of human error. Yes, the 4 rules solve all but people are fallible and new shooters without ingrained safety habits are at higher risk. I would rather insure against fallibility than gamble my loved ones life on perfection when the revolver will do the job.

      7. One virtue of “Old Slabsides,” is the availability of .22″LR conversion kits, for less expensive practice.

        PS: Anyone who badmouths the M1911 is that poor workman who blames his tools. I am a fair shot, though I will never be a Governor’s Cup competitor; once upon a time I picked up a rattlety-bang M1911 that the house gunsmith at the club, had assembled on the spot out of a parts bin, with parts from many different manufacturers, and with it I shot 79 out pf 100.

    2. Ten years ago my 5′ 2″-tall wife and I decided to go to Gunsite for our 10th wedding anniversary. Since she couldn’t use her .22 Buck Mark she rented several 9mm hanguns, but outshot me at the range the first time she picked up a 1911. She did great at Gunsite with her Kimber Custom II!

    3. A pistol is a very personal weapon, and what one person goes for another will have trouble with. I recommend that you get some friends to go with you and your wife to the range, friends that will let your wife try their handguns and see what she likes. If this isn’t possible, perhaps there is a range that has rental pistols available. Have her hold and shoot a variety of handguns, then go buy one.

      1. Agreed. There is no such thing as a “woman’s gun”. Just try on a buch of different ones until you find the one that she is most comfortable with.

  8. I wish our Founding Fathers had anticipated this kind of crap, and had written it into the Constitution that all bills must be single-purpose, or at least, that amendments have at least something to do with the rest of the bill.

      1. Yep … I mean, all of our current weapons are so much more destructive, than, say a round of grape or canister from an artillery piece, which a private person could buy in the US before and after the revolution.

        Or even grenades, which any private individual could buy in bulk until 1968.

        I hope you were being sarcastic, Fluffy.

  9. The fact that they’re pushing for a size magazine regulation shows how deprived of intelligence these people are. It is a good thing Holmes was using that 100 round drum because it was guaranteed to jam. If he had used 10 – 10 round magazines, the death total would’ve been much higher than 12.

  10. As long as we stay on the ball about this, I see this getting about as much traction as the same attempt after Congresswoman Giffords was shot. IMO, that incident had a better chance of getting a mag cap ban in place b/c the best way to intimidate a congresscritter into doing something that immoral is to threaten his or her life, and that’s essentially what the Gifford’s shooting did: made them all feel their mortality. And if that didn’t weaken their spines to Schumer’s BS, I doubt this will… provided we apply the appropriate spine-stiffener to make them think twice about caving.

  11. Schumer has been a pain in the ass for decades. He has Secret Service protection because so many people who were in uniform recognize he is a domestic enemy of the Constitution. He is seditious, more of a threat to the Republic than Al Queda because he is on the inside, and definitely not an American. I’ve been to NYC, and the city seemed OK. Just expensive, a lot of hustlers, and a lot of people working their tails off for money. The pedicab bicycle guy was the only one who would pick me up at 2200 EST at Times Square – and he earned his money. He sure wasn’t being represented by Schumer, as He needs a firearm on his hip to dissuade robbers – he does a lot of cash business.
    I published your link with my editorial content far and wide. He’s willing to screw our national security for large capacity magazines. I didn’t see him banning rental trucks after OKC.

  12. I think this is part of a conspiracy on the part of the ACLU and thier cronies to get more people to oppose the silly cybersecurity bill.

  13. “Maybe we could come together on guns if each side gave some,” Schumer said.
    Ever notice it always seems to be US who have to do the giving?

    “Schumer also pointed out that it would be reasonable for the right to recognize that background checks on those buying guns is necessary”
    4473, anyone? Sheesh!

    1. As far as us being able to “come together on guns,” compromise only benefits the person in the weaker position, yet it’s what the left is constantly holding up as to what we should all aspire in our dealings with one another.

      And in regard to your second quote from Schumer, I fear that we are getting closer and closer to the point where the majority of Americans look at guns as some sort of mystical black voodoo magic that is as misunderstood as it is feared due to nothing more than ignorance. When we reach that point they can say whatever they want about guns, gun owners, the gun buying process, etc, and said majority will accept it as truth since they have no frame of reference. That statement from Schumer, if read by someone who has never bought a gun, would lead the reader to believe that there is no background check. And as pointed out by you, that is complete and utter horseshit. But someone who is ignorant of the process will think, “yeah, there should be a background check. It’s crazy that they don’t have one now.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.