HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Marine To Sen. Feinstein ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 12:49 PM

Marine To Sen. Feinstein – ‘Some Woman’ Will Not Limit My Assault Weapons

Marine To Sen. Feinstein – ‘Some Woman’ Will Not Limit My Assault Weapons
2013/01/05 - http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/01/05/marine-to-sen-feinstein-some-woman-will-not-limit-my-assault-weapons/
By Lorraine Devon Wilke

.....

The letter in its entirety, without corrections, is as follows:

Senator Dianne Feinstein,

I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government’s right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma’am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.

I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America. I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.

I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.

We, the people, deserve better than you.

Respectfully Submitted,
Joshua Boston
Cpl, United States Marine Corps
2004-2012

74 replies, 5134 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 74 replies Author Time Post
Reply Marine To Sen. Feinstein – ‘Some Woman’ Will Not Limit My Assault Weapons (Original post)
Coyotl Jan 2013 OP
MjolnirTime Jan 2013 #1
Coyotl Jan 2013 #3
Pretzel_Warrior Jan 2013 #6
SugarShack Jan 2013 #2
SharonAnn Jan 2013 #40
TheCowsCameHome Jan 2013 #4
Siwsan Jan 2013 #5
rateyes Jan 2013 #8
Marengo Jan 2013 #13
Lurks Often Jan 2013 #26
jmowreader Jan 2013 #66
crim son Jan 2013 #7
rateyes Jan 2013 #9
Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #10
MrScorpio Jan 2013 #11
Undismayed Jan 2013 #12
Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #14
derby378 Jan 2013 #17
Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #20
coalition_unwilling Jan 2013 #47
derby378 Jan 2013 #50
Undismayed Jan 2013 #19
Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #21
billh58 Jan 2013 #43
Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #44
billh58 Jan 2013 #45
Darth_Kitten Jan 2013 #39
Undismayed Jan 2013 #41
spanone Jan 2013 #15
Cleita Jan 2013 #16
Ikonoklast Jan 2013 #18
derby378 Jan 2013 #22
Ikonoklast Jan 2013 #24
derby378 Jan 2013 #51
jeff47 Jan 2013 #57
derby378 Jan 2013 #60
jeff47 Jan 2013 #64
derby378 Jan 2013 #70
jeff47 Jan 2013 #71
derby378 Jan 2013 #72
Takket Jan 2013 #23
gulliver Jan 2013 #25
Robb Jan 2013 #36
madrchsod Jan 2013 #27
NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #28
Undismayed Jan 2013 #30
Coyotl Jan 2013 #31
Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #32
Undismayed Jan 2013 #42
Kaleva Jan 2013 #46
JaneyVee Jan 2013 #29
JI7 Jan 2013 #33
TheCowsCameHome Jan 2013 #38
Coyotl Jan 2013 #63
stevenleser Jan 2013 #34
undeterred Jan 2013 #35
Darth_Kitten Jan 2013 #37
Oldenuff Jan 2013 #48
Coyotl Jan 2013 #53
Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #59
davidn3600 Jan 2013 #61
Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #62
Coyotl Jan 2013 #68
Oldenuff Jan 2013 #74
Raine Jan 2013 #49
Skittles Jan 2013 #52
Hoyt Jan 2013 #54
NoGOPZone Jan 2013 #55
derby378 Jan 2013 #56
Cali_Democrat Jan 2013 #58
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #65
jmowreader Jan 2013 #67
ellie Jan 2013 #69
Paladin Jan 2013 #73

Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 12:51 PM

1. Then this piece of shit will go to jail. Problem solved.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #1)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 12:53 PM

3. Where he can take a few classes and work on that IQ problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MjolnirTime (Reply #1)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 12:58 PM

6. That's what I was thinking

 

You better be a good boy! One felony and then they can tell you "You'll have nothing and like it!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 12:53 PM

2. What a sexist marine! Can a female marine chime in here????

 

Just as easily, a male senator could be trying to remove assault weapons from a female service member.

That's why I call him "sexist".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SugarShack (Reply #2)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 06:49 PM

40. Seems like he could be the next mass murderer. This "some woman" comment, showing

who he's outraged with is the tipoff.

In Newtown, CT, the mother was apparently going to take action to have guardanship of her son so he "showed her".

This seems to be a strong current in these killings, an outrage against women or a woman.

I told my friend when we first heard about the Newtown, CT shooting "I'll bet he's angry with some woman who laid the law down to him."

Turns out I may have been right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 12:55 PM

4. Fuck off, Josh

I couldn't care less about what you were or who you are.

Seek help before you go over the edge completel.y

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 12:57 PM

5. I'm not really familiar with all things Marines, but 8 years and still an E-4 (Corporal)?

Serious question, going by his signature - is that a typical rate of advancement? Especially during a time of conflict?? I am a cold-war Navy veteran and the rate of advancement was much faster than that.

I just get the feeling there's a lot of story in this guy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Siwsan (Reply #5)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:39 PM

8. I hear you. My dad was a Seargeant in the AF when he left after serving only 4 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Siwsan (Reply #5)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:48 PM

13. My experience is outdated, but...

When I served, it wasn't unheard of depending on the MOS. In my MOS field, 2500, there were a multitude of what were known as "contract corporals", or Marines who signed into the 2500 field for a guarantee of E-4 within a certain period of time in service (I don't remember what that time period was). Owing to the glut of contract E-4's, it was very difficult for the rest of us to acheive even E-4 in the first enlistment. Most did in the second, but it could be a couple more years depending on the "cutting score".

In other MOS fields, such as infantry, the promo rate was much faster due in part to much higher attrition.

It is my understanding that promo rates are traditionally accelerated in war-time, but I could very well be wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Siwsan (Reply #5)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 03:34 PM

26. The Marine Corp is a relatively small

branch of the armed forces, so promotions, on average, would be slower then in the Army, Navy or Air Force.

It can also vary by unit, since a unit is only authorized a certain number of individuals in a given rank

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Siwsan (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:30 AM

66. It is REALLY hard to make rank in the Marines if you're not in the infantry

8 years is "high year of tenure" for Marine corporals - if they don't get promoted to sergeant by then, they go home.

During the Cold War, it was much easier to get promoted in any branch than it is now - now, they're trying to get rid of people and HYT (retention control points in the Army) are the easiest way to do it...they hit RCP, they go home, no sitting around trying to make up atrocities about reasonably decent people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:00 PM

7. "Respectfully" my a**. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:41 PM

9. Dear Cpl. Boston,

Fuck off.

Sincerely,
One of the people for whom you work, asshole.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:45 PM

10. I hope there's no violence against those advocating stricter gun control laws. This guy is scary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:45 PM

11. Keep reaching for that rainbow, Josh

Only, soon, you'll be reaching for it while you're out of the Corps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:48 PM

12. While I disagree with the mysogyny, I agree with his sentiment regarding guns.

 

Diane Feinstein is an unabashed hypocrite. She perpetuates the guns for the rich ,but not the poor meme.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Undismayed (Reply #12)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:49 PM

14. So you support people not complying with registering their assault rifles if that becomes a law?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mrs. Overall (Reply #14)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:07 PM

17. So you support tearing down the Second Amendment?

Good luck with that. I don't care much for the "some woman" remark, but the rest is certainly worth considering.

And since "assault rifles" are by convention fully automatic, what sort of weapons are you referring to?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to derby378 (Reply #17)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:10 PM

20. I don't know fuck about weapons. I'm asking if he/she supports refusal to comply with new laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to derby378 (Reply #17)


Response to coalition_unwilling (Reply #47)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:58 PM

50. Oh, this is too good... (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mrs. Overall (Reply #14)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:10 PM

19. I am a law abbiding citizen. However, I will cheer on the romanticists.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Undismayed (Reply #19)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:14 PM

21. Really? I don't understand that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mrs. Overall (Reply #21)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 08:48 PM

43. You are talking to

a Gungeon supporter, and one who has claimed that the 2nd Amendment allows for an armed insurrection against the government of the United States of America.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2124742

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billh58 (Reply #43)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 08:55 PM

44. But to me that view (gungeon) seems incongruous with being a Democrat and the values

that are traditionally Democratic.

I can't believe DU tolerates some of the awful crap I just read in that forum. Really nasty anti-government, anti-Biden, etc... posts. Wow. We are very tolerant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mrs. Overall (Reply #44)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:16 PM

45. I totally agree

and the Gungeon is basically a right-wing, neoconservative enclave on DU. Since the Admins have recently allowed the discussion of guns in GD, the Gungeoneers have brought in recruits from other right-wing sites who have been heavily trolling DU. MIRT has been removing them in droves, but they keep coming back.

I guess you could say that we are tolerant, but it certainly stinks up the place...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Undismayed (Reply #12)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 06:29 PM

39. Right, and that overrides blatant misogyny every time, eh?

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Darth_Kitten (Reply #39)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 08:33 PM

41. I don't understand your point.

 

I said that I don't appreciate the misogyny, but hold a similar view regarding guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:50 PM

15. wanna bet, hotdog?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:50 PM

16. Well, some women will not have sex with a man who expresses these kinds

of misogynist opinions. I hope he enjoys his solitude.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:09 PM

18. Serving in the military does not confer special rights on one.

Break the law, suffer the consequences.

If it comes to it, registering ownership of a semi-automatic weapon is easier than having to serve prison time for refusing to do so, becoming a convicted felon, then losing your right to own a firearm.

But, stupid people usually make poor decisions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ikonoklast (Reply #18)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:17 PM

22. From what I understand...

...if Feinstein's bill becomes law, that Marine's weapon is confiscated. Immediately. Then it gets registered. And then this Marine has to go through the entire process to get a permit (actually, an NFA Class 3 tax stamp) that would allow him to repurchase the gun in question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to derby378 (Reply #22)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:31 PM

24. That proposed legislation has little chance of being passed as written.

I'd put it at 0%.

There will be no confiscation or retro-active banning.

Registration is about it, and some transfer rights regulated under the auspices of an expanded NFA.

At best, that's what will come out of all this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ikonoklast (Reply #24)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:00 PM

51. Perhaps - but I'll oppose that as well

Semi-automatic firearms have been in civilian hands in America for over 200 years, and it's far too late for Sen. Feinstein to start trying to restrict them now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to derby378 (Reply #51)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:15 PM

57. I'm very interested to learn what 200 year-old weapon you think is semi-auto.

I think you were meaning 1776, but we'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say 1813.

Once you do, you should probably go edit this Wikipedia page, since they point out the first semi-automatic weapon was invented in 1885. In Germany. Meaning it would be very unlikely to be found in the US at that time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #57)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:17 PM

60. That's what I originally thought...

...until I learned about the Girandoni rifle that Lewis and Clark carried into the wilderness. Semi-automatic with a 20-round magazine. Wikipedia is indeed your friend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to derby378 (Reply #60)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:32 PM

64. Um, no.

First, it was an air rifle, not a firearm.

Second:
This gravity operated design was such that the rifle had to be pointed upwards in order to drop each ball into the breech block.

That's as semi-auto as a lever-action rifle. Which isn't semi-auto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #64)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:56 PM

70. Doesn't matter...

The air reservoir generated enough pressure to bring down game. This wasn't some ol' pellet gun. And with a 20-round mag, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to derby378 (Reply #70)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:54 PM

71. Yet it's still not semi-auto.

Again, it had to be waved in the air to reload it. It did not "chamber" a new round after firing.

That means it's not semi-auto. Just like bolt-action or lever-action rifles are not semi-auto. Just like single-action revolvers aren't semi-auto.

So what semi-auto is 200 years old?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #71)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 06:53 PM

72. Neither were the pump-action shotguns targeted in Washington state

They were labelled "assault weapons" by state legislators, too.

Nice try.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:20 PM

23. the fatal flaw in his argument is one sentance

"I am the person whom you serve."

No, sir, she does not serve YOU. She serves the PEOPLE. She serves the common good of the public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:55 PM

25. I think I've seen this movie. He drives a taxi, right? n/t



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gulliver (Reply #25)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 06:23 PM

36. No, but he fantasizes about shooting people who cut him off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 03:48 PM

27. maybe skittles can set him straight

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 03:56 PM

28. Does Feinstein own an Assault Weapon?

I thought she just had a CCW. In which the "hypocrite" label is pure nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NashvilleLefty (Reply #28)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 04:04 PM

30. Owns a handgun and has a ccw- opposes ccw for others.

 

Yes, she thinks she's so special that she gets to carry and no one else does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Undismayed (Reply #30)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 05:38 PM

31. Enjoy your stay bashing Dems with false info.

while you still can

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #31)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 06:02 PM

32. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #31)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 08:41 PM

42. Which part of what I said is false?

 

http://www.mrctv.org/videos/feinstein-1995-her-concealed-carry-permit-i-know-urge-arm-yourself-because-thats-what-i-did

She admits that she obtained a ccw and a handgun on video. Not only that ,but she got it in California where an average citizen has no hope of getting one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Undismayed (Reply #30)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:16 PM

46. To get a CCW, her gun had to be registered.

The Marine who wrote the letter is arguing against having his AR-15 registered and says he won't do that if it becomes the law.

At the time Senator Feinstein got her CCW back in the 1970s, she was a target of the New World Liberation Front. She got rid of her permit once that organization was no longer a threat to her.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/273989-feinstein-doesnt-have-concealed-carry-permit-anymore

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 04:03 PM

29. If only every gun owner had to go through the same firearms training he went through.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 06:11 PM

33. pic of the guy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #33)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 06:27 PM

38. Dude with 'tude. Just as I figured.

Grow up, sonny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #33)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:30 PM

63. Here is a screen grab of his posting. Note the avatar text. He is a SICKO!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 06:17 PM

34. Oh yes he will comply. The military is very harsh on lawbreakers. Even those who break seemingly

minor laws. And anyone who has been in for eight years knows that quite well.

I would not be surprised if this corporal has already been made to stand at attention while a major or higher ranking officer has reminded him of his obligation to obey all laws and that officer made sure the corporal said "yes sir" or "yes ma'am" before being dismissed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 06:20 PM

35. What a misogynist prick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 06:26 PM

37. Save the contempt and hatred of women for your female relatives, boy...

I'm sure they are used to it.

Grow up, honey.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:57 PM

48. I agree with him.

Like it or not,I think he is right on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Oldenuff (Reply #48)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:06 PM

53. No, he is totally disrespectful and entirely wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Oldenuff (Reply #48)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:16 PM

59. So, you advocate breaking the law if some sort of legislation were to pass--

you would refuse to register your weapon or give up a automatic/assault (whatever the hell it is) weapon? And you would advise other Americans to also refuse to follow any new legislation?

Wow, you people really love your guns or else you are really scared.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mrs. Overall (Reply #59)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:24 PM

61. The gun control law is what will be illegal. The 2nd amendment takes precedence

People who own guns see it as a Constitutionally-protected right. If gun bans are passed, lots of people will see it as the government attempting to trample the Bill of Rights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidn3600 (Reply #61)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:28 PM

62. Will the gun control law truly be illegal (will the Supreme Court declare it illegal) or

are gun advocates just using that as an excuse. I guess I'm asking what's truly "legal"--the law or the protected right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidn3600 (Reply #61)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 07:11 AM

68. Now you are part of the problem too.

A law is not illegal by definition. A law can be declared unconstitutional by a court.
If you are in high school yet, you should have learned this by now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mrs. Overall (Reply #59)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 05:56 AM

74. You people??

Just because I don't toe the party line and can think for myself,I am one of "those people"?

I am grateful that I can think independently,and wish that more people would/could.Rights are rights.You can spin the issue up to make it look like something else,but it is still a right.

Do you suppose there are many Republicans who believe what they believe because they have been deceived and won't think an issue thru and make their own determination based on fact?If you believe that Republicans can be lead astray,why wouldn't you believe it could also happen to Dems?

The effort to separate people from their guns has to start sometime,and I believe that time has begun.An unarmed populace is far easier to control.

To answer the question: you would refuse to register your weapon or give up a automatic/assault (whatever the hell it is) weapon? And you would advise other Americans to also refuse to follow any new legislation?

If we had been a law abiding people,we would still be one of the Colonies.Just because someone passes a law restricting a right,does not mean people will obey it.Some people will always stand up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:16 PM

49. So if she was a man could he deal with that. I wonder if he listened to

his mother when she told him to pick up his toys, probably mother had to have father tell him. His attitude toward women is disgusting if he was my son I would be so ashamed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:06 PM

52. poor little Josh, paranoid a woman will take his weapons

that guy should be NOWHERE NEAR weapons

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:10 PM

54. Typical under-educated, gun toting yahoo.

Nothing like my Marine buddy who can't stand guns and respects Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:11 PM

55. Now there's a smart career move, a military guy announcing he isnt going to follow the law nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:13 PM

56. Guys, if you haven't seen this yet...

The link is gone, but some enterprising DUers managed a screen grab:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022144873

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:06 AM

65. I wonder whether Joshua Boston understands why Dianne Feinstein is particularly interested

in preventing the abuse of guns.

On November 27, 1978, San Francisco mayor George Moscone and supervisor Harvey Milk were assassinated by a rival politician, Dan White, who had resigned from the Board of Supervisors only two weeks prior. Feinstein was close by in City Hall at the time of the shootings, and discovered Milk's body after hearing the gunshots and going to investigate. Later that day at a press conference originally organized by Moscone to announce White's successor, Feinstein announced the assassinations to the stunned public, stating: "As president of the board of supervisors, it's my duty to make this announcement. Both Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk have been shot and killed."

Feinstein appears in archival footage and is credited in the Academy Award-winning documentary film The Times of Harvey Milk (1984). She appears again briefly in archival footage, announcing the death of Moscone and Milk in the 2008 film Milk. Feinstein and her position as President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors are also alluded to several times in the movie, and a portrayal of her character has a few off-screen lines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dianne_Feinstein#Mayor_of_San_Francisco

Moscone planned to announce White's replacement days later, on November 27, 1978. A half hour before the press conference, White entered City Hall through a basement window to avoid metal detectors, and made his way to Moscone's office. Witnesses heard shouting between White and Moscone, then gunshots. White shot the mayor in the shoulder and chest, then twice in the head after Moscone had fallen on the floor. White then quickly walked to his former office, reloading his police-issue revolver with hollow-point bullets along the way, and intercepted Milk, asking him to step inside for a moment. Dianne Feinstein heard gunshots and called the police. She found Milk face down on the floor, shot five times, including twice in the head at close range. After identifying both bodies, Feinstein was shaking so badly she required support from the police chief. It was she who announced to the press, "Today San Francisco has experienced a double tragedy of immense proportions. As President of the Board of Supervisors, it is my duty to inform you that both Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk have been shot and killed," then adding after being drowned out by shouts of disbelief, "and the suspect is Supervisor Dan White." Milk was 48 years old. Moscone was 49.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Milk

I think Boston is way out of line.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:36 AM

67. No wonder you got out as a corporal!

Tell me this dumbass, in his nastygram to a sitting United States Senator, didn't just admit he owns an AR-15.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 09:05 AM

69. Isn't he precious?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 07:02 PM

73. Everybody Check Out The Rude Pundit's Site.


The Rudester hands this guy his ass on a platter, in typically vicious, foul-mouthed fashion.

Hope you enjoyed it, Cpl. Boston. If it helps any, The Rude Pundit is a man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread