HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Democratic Senator (Feins...

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 10:15 AM

Democratic Senator (Feinstein): ‘We Do Have Support’ For An Assault Weapons Ban"

Source: Think Progress

on Jan 27, 2013 at 10:02 am

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) pledged to include an assault weapons ban in any legislation designed to improve gun safety and insisted, during an appearance on CNN’s State of the Union Sunday, that “we do have support” in the Senate for such a provision.

The California Democrat, who introduced legislation banning 150 assault weapons earlier this week, conceded that the ban would present an “uphill fight,” but said that Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has promised that she could introduce the proposal as an amendment should it not be included in the comprehensive gun safety bill that advances to the Senate floor:


FEINSTEIN: This has been an uphill fight. This has never been easy. This is the hardest of the hard. Now, will it only be assault weapons? No. Most likely there will be a package put together. If assault weapons is left out of the package and I’m a member of the Judiciary number two in seniority. I’ve been assured by the Majority Leader I will be able to do it as an amendment on the floor. Which is the way I did it in 1993. So that doesn’t particularly bother me.

Feinstein also agreed that armed security may help prevent school shootings, noting that “one-third of the schools in America today have school guards.” But, she insisted, “having school guards really isn’t the whole answer. The more you have these weapons, these military style weapons that with the single stock of the AR-15 can be made fully automatic, the minute you have it in the Sandy Hook killer’s hands, you have a devastating weapon.”



Read more: http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/01/27/1500641/democratic-senator-we-do-have-support-for-an-assault-weapons-ban/

23 replies, 3370 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 23 replies Author Time Post
Reply Democratic Senator (Feinstein): ‘We Do Have Support’ For An Assault Weapons Ban" (Original post)
kpete Jan 2013 OP
nick of time Jan 2013 #1
Thinkingabout Jan 2013 #3
nick of time Jan 2013 #4
Thinkingabout Jan 2013 #13
nick of time Jan 2013 #14
Ter Jan 2013 #16
alp227 Jan 2013 #19
Thinkingabout Jan 2013 #2
rateyes Jan 2013 #5
nick of time Jan 2013 #6
SHRED Jan 2013 #7
Third Doctor Jan 2013 #8
SHRED Jan 2013 #9
nick of time Jan 2013 #10
SHRED Jan 2013 #11
nick of time Jan 2013 #12
reACTIONary Jan 2013 #17
samsingh Jan 2013 #15
krispos42 Jan 2013 #18
NickB79 Jan 2013 #20
JustABozoOnThisBus Jan 2013 #23
Adam-Bomb Jan 2013 #21
Crepuscular Jan 2013 #22

Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 10:24 AM

1. I'm curious.

 

Just how does Sen. Feinstein think that an AWB is going to survive a filibuster? Especially now that Sen. Reid has caved on the filibuster reform? And what about the 5 or 6 red state Dem. senators that have already come out in opposition to any new AWB? How does she get around that?
And how does she think that any AWB will get through the repuke controlled House?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #1)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 10:27 AM

3. Sanity needs to start somewhere, Thank You Diane Feinstein for taking a stand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #3)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 10:29 AM

4. While I agree that sanity needs to start somewhere,

 

you failed to answer the questions.
The reality is that she doesn't have the votes and I suspect that Reid is throwing her this bone knowing that an AWB is going nowhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #4)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 11:17 AM

13. I did agree there was probably not enough votes and I added sanity needs to start.

When MADD first started they did not accomplish their desire to get rid of all drunk drivers but they pushed and as a result there have been stiffer sentences for drunk driving charges and no longer just pushed under the rug. If NRA was the organization they should be instead of scaring everyone and in turn they run out and buy guns like crazy people and spend most of their efforts in gun safety and sensible weapons they would not have to spend so much money trying to go crazy. I have guns myself and my family are hunters and I realize proper game preseveration includes taking of game. I don't think any citizen has the right to go shooting wildly with a high capacity war weapons. This has become a problem. Blame mental illness, games or movies the end result when the liberty of owning guns allows the attack on innocent American citizens has to stop. Have NRA spend money on getting these other issues brought under control but don't urge more guns, that is crazy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #13)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 11:19 AM

14. Agree 100%.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #1)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 12:30 PM

16. Did Republicans filibuster the 1994 ban?

 

I don't remember.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ter (Reply #16)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 07:29 PM

19. No they couldn't.

The Republicans listed a series of amendments to cut spending, which they labeled "pork," and to toughen some of the bill's criminal provisions as measures they would press if the point of order survived a challenge.

Once the tactic failed, it was clear that Republicans could not maintain a filibuster, which also takes 60 votes to halt, although Senator Bob Dole of Kansas, the minority leader, said he was not sure how long they would persist.


(http://www.nytimes.com/1994/08/26/us/decision-senate-overview-crime-bill-approved-61-38-but-senate-going-home-without.html?pagewanted=all" target="_blank">NY Times, 8/26/94)

According to the official roll call vote, 61 senators voted yea, essentially rendering any filibuster attempt worthless.

The two Dems who voted nay: Richard Shelby (who later became a Republican) and Russ Feingold.

The Republicans who voted yea: Lincoln Chafee (who became an independent in 2010 or 2011), William Cohen, John Danforth, Jim Jeffords (who became independent in 2001 or so), Nancy Kassebaum, Bill Roth, and Arlen Specter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 10:26 AM

2. I don't like the idea of having armed guards in schools but we must admit the mass killings

is not limited to schools. One of the common items in mass killings is guns, the type of guns used in wars, we do not need to possess weapons of wars. I hope soon we can have the courage to stand up to the crazy thoughts where the Second Amendment does not restrict regulations. If a hunter is such a poor shot they can not bring home game without large capacity weapons then they need to get training, not larger capacity. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 10:38 AM

5. Well, if Harry promised it, then

dont count on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rateyes (Reply #5)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 10:41 AM

6. Just like he promised tough filibuster reform.

 

That worked well, didn't it?
The irony is that Sen. Feinstein wouldn't go along with the tougher parts of the reform so in essence, she shot down her chances of getting a new AWB through the Sen..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #6)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 10:48 AM

7. It's a joke


Feinstein did not back the talking filibuster.

This smells funny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Reply #7)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 10:50 AM

8. That's what I just thought.

She is just grand standing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Third Doctor (Reply #8)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 10:51 AM

9. That's a good word for it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Reply #7)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 10:52 AM

10. I wonder if that was the quid pro quo?

 

She refuses to back the talking filibuster and in exchange, Reid will allow her to attach her AWB to other legislation, but because she didn't back the talking filibuster, her chances of passing a new AWB is pretty moot.
You can't make this shit up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #10)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 10:58 AM

11. Feinstein opposed the talking filibuster...

... so she in essence assured a continued 41 vote minority control of the Senate. With that 41 vote control it means that no meaningful AWB or gun control will ever make it to the Senate floor.

For her to 'grandstand' like this is a sick joke.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Reply #11)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 11:00 AM

12. I couldn't agree more.

 

It will also stop other progressive legislation, so the effects of this failure to reform the filibuster will be far reaching.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nick of time (Reply #6)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 01:18 PM

17. Dems have a majority, now, but...

...that may not always be the case. In fact, the majority is pretty slim and there is turnover every two years. Reid might be taking a longer view of the issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 12:29 PM

15. i hope so

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 02:24 PM

18. She has support for a ban on protruding pistol grips on rifles and shotguns.

Yay, progress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #18)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 08:25 PM

20. Well, that's sure to stop crime!

Hell, it's not like non-pistol-gripped rifles or shotguns could possibly be dangerous:

http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=cAK&sa=X&tbo=d&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&biw=1366&bih=636&tbm=isch&tbnid=EbUTYEoX2HKRsM:&imgrefurl=http://weaponsman.com/%3Fp%3D1413&docid=MwKHFbOzct10eM&imgurl=&w=1200&h=450&ei=c9MFUdKQI6rB2QWbwICYBg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=740&vpy=187&dur=1425&hovh=137&hovw=367&tx=190&ty=85&sig=111169568567700792943&page=1&tbnh=110&tbnw=260&start=0&ndsp=16&ved=1t:429,r:3,s:0,i:146

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #20)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 07:01 AM

23. M-14 is two less than M-16, so it must be less powerful

And the magazine only holds 20 rounds, not 30, so no, not dangerous at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 08:29 PM

21. Support, yes. Enough support, probably not.

Before I get started, I might as well say "Hello, DU."

Yes, Senator Feinstein HAS support, a lot of it.

Whether or not she has enough support to get anything meaningful passed,
I dunno. It hurts my mouth to say it, but there it is.

Too many pols worrying about their JOBS instead of doing what is right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 09:30 PM

22. Meaningless

A meaningless bill that would accomplish nothing in terms of actually reducing gun violence. Instead of political grandstanding over a bill that has no chance of ever being enacted, why not start with some incremental changes such as requiring that all transfers go through a licensed FFL holder and creating a federal firearms license that gun owners would be required to qualify for and renew, similar to what already exists in some states. Pass those things and use it as something to build on, instead of promoting meaningless fluff that is based on cosmetics, not functionality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread