When the Senate Judiciary committee held hearings on gun control last month, DiFi wasn’t happy. The panel of witnesses assembled by Chairman Pat Leahy was far too balanced for her tastes. It included people who actually opposed an “assault weapons” ban, among other firearms ownership restrictions. So Sen. Leahy allowed her to assemble her own kangaroo-court style group of advocates for civilian disarmament. You can count on them to provide all the histrionics the network evening news will have time to air. View it here. UPDATE: Holy shotty Batman! Two of the witnesses (law Professor Nicholas Johnson and attorney David Hardy) are shredding DiFI’s S150 with common sense and rational analysis, pointing out that ALL guns are dangerous and shotguns are just as deadly as “assault rifles” (or more so). Feinstein’s fuming, or considering banning scatterguns. The third (FL Rep. Sandy Adams) says it won’t work. Wow. Is someone recording this?

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

79 COMMENTS

    • I can’t watch this farce either. Especially when orchestrated by a life form I consider to be an enemy of the Constitution and a national subversive. California, I don’t care what your excuse is, you send her to the US Senate year after year and now she is a national hemorrhoid. Thanks.

      • Sammy,

        I know for a fact that I have never voted for her, Pelosi, or Boxer, but the 2 main population centers of the state, SF and LA continue to render my votes and those of my pro 2A friends null and void. It’s frustrating to say the least and beyond infuriating on a daily basis!

    • You don’t have to Kat, I did it for you. Having suffered through today’s Senate hearings I could only dream of what they could be like if everybody simply spoke the truth. Here’s my version, all imaginary of coarse.

      Chair: Welcome to my dog and pony show with lots of emotional appeal and a few actual experts that the Republicans forced me to include. First we have a government hack and a PC prop-cop to start off.
      Mr Hack & Prop, do you agree that I’m a really wonderful gal with a terrific law that will eliminate all crime?

      Govt Hack: You bet! Prop-Cop: Oh yeah! Chair: Thanks!!! You’re making me blush. Senator….

      Republican Senator: How many real investigations of illegal gun transactions have you done?

      Hack: None. I’m just marking time in that backwater until I can get back to DC and some real power.

      Prop Cop? I’m too busy takin’ tough, fightin’ crime in the street and mouthing PC platitudes for my establishment overlords to have any time for that.

      Republican Senator: You talk about crimes committed by known criminals against each other with guns already illegal, doesn’t that argue against your position?

      Prop Cop: Duh – Yeah – I guess I got confused, let me deflect attention by meandering through a couple of melodramatic sob-stories having nothing to do with the subject at hand.

      Republican Senator: You mention AR 15’s & 30 round mags being unnecessary – what do your guys carry?

      Prop cop: AR 15’s with 30 round magazines. Republican Senator: Retirees too? – Yes.
      How come they’re OK for you but not for me? Prop-Cop: We’re more important than you are.

      Republican Senator: Mr Hack, you say that in Aurora the shooter could have done much less damage with 10 round mags, do you really think that a whacked out lunatic, set on mass murder, would obey a law on mag sizes?

      Hack: Of course not, but I’m paid to mouth this crap and that’s what I’ll do.

      Chair: We’ll now go to the tragic victims of Sandy Hook who we’ll pretend to greave with but who we’ll shamelessly parade in a desperate effort to move this turkey along. Hopefully there will be some ugly incident our buddies in the media can replay endlessly. We’ll also include a few people who actually know what they’re talking about who we’ll try to discredit.

      Tell Me, Distraught Doctor – Do you have anything to add except an anguished recall of horrible memories and various grabber ideas we gave you that we’ve had knocking around for the past 100 years? Doc: No…

      Chair: OK, now we are forced to listen to these 3. You people just don’t care about little children and want them to die – right?

      The 3: Of course not! What we do want is to present our concerns about personal and Constitutional matters which we’ve carefully documented and experienced.

      Chair: OK that’s enough of that – we really don’t have an answer to your facts so lets move on to the mayor of a large urban hell-hole with a carefully preserved tourist center, a carefully patrolled rich-guy area and a crime-ridden, living hell of slums and abandoned wrecks. You want to do your bit?

      Mayor Slick: Sure, I’m here to lay out the same ol’ baloney that got me elected and keeps me in power. Unbelievable how dumb the voters are – I thought they’d wise up by now.

      Republican Senator: Exactly how many people were murdered by assault rifles in your city last year?

      Mayor Slick: Actually none but I’ll run you around (and run out your time) with some misleading stats and some tear-jerker stories. I also resent these 3 coming up with facts. Not fair.

      Lard-Assed Old Democrat Senator: I don’t really have anything to say but I’ll babble on for a bit to try and inject some more emotion into this and throw out some mindless accusations which I won’t let you respond to – because I can.

      Chair: Well there you are. It didn’t work before, it won’t work now but gee-whiz, we’re trying.
      This brings to an end another episode of The Constitution – Who Needs It?

      • I don’t think I have laughed that hard in years. Thank you. If it weren’t true, it wouldn’t be as funny.

    • No I understand why everyone hates lawyers. These legislators drive me nuts! Remember there is another voice out there. 1 Million Moms AGAINST Gun Control is tearing it up across the country. Check them out. http://muzzlefront.com/1-million-moms-against-gun-control/

      Let’s also remember that the 2008 supreme court case DC v Heller was clear that the firearms legal today are standard issue for both civilians and civilian police forces. Therefore they are standard issue and protected under the 2A. Period. any move against the current limits is an infringement and treasonous.

  2. Diane Feinstein is truly a public servant. She is helping the media avoid charges of imbalance by removing the balance beforehand. Now the news can honestly report that “everyone” at the hearing supports her ban. Thank you, Senator Feinstein, for looking out for your hardworking friends in the media.

  5. I was completely on board when they said we need to provide better mental health services but I didn’t know that all they had in mind was nucleating the social persecution of completely innocent law abiding gun owners for the sake of superficial emotional catharsis…

  7. Seems like the guy from AZ and the lady from FL are looking for actual common sense in this common-sense AWB.

    So it wasnt an entire wash.

    Guy from Philly is delusional and ignorant tho.

    • The professor actually is very helpful and told them point blank they will lose at SCOTUS, but hey, throw the dice.

      Blumenthal looks like a pedophile.

      • “The professor actually is very helpful and told them point blank they will lose at SCOTUS, but hey, throw the dice. ”

        Trouble is, it may take 10 or 20 years before a relative case makes its way to the Supreme Court. Until then, we have to live with whatever POS legislation gets passed. Far better to head them off at the pass, so to speak….

        • “The Law’s Delay” as Shakespeare said, is maddening but I don’t think it will take that long. There’s a good appeal right now on NY’s Sullivan Law which should settle a lot of this stuff and Scalia is waiting.

  9. It wasn’t so bad, then the Mayors Against America showed up.

    It is amazing to see how the pro gun witnesses are armed with facts, reason, and proposals for actual change.

    The gun grabbers’ testimonies are based on emotional key words and taking advantage of victims.

    • It’s kinda funny.

      Mayors Against Illegal Guns. Funny fact: Most of them can’t even own guns. That’s why they don’t want you to have them either!!

  10. Look at that strangle hold she’s got in that screen cap. If I wasn’t working, I would totally put uncle sam in that death grip. (Photoshop)

  11. The Panel is submitting conflicting statements. One said that in the average shooting there are four rounds fired, well within the proposed 10 round limit. The next person states that people are getting shot, 10 – 15 times and bleeding out before they can get to the hospital.

    • They are. Rarely.

      Small clips won’t chnge that. After the first clip, the target probably isn’t doing much.

      Once they’re down, someone really mean can change clips and spend another seven bucks on ’em if that’s their idea of reasonable conduct.

      It s what it is.

    • “One said that in the average shooting there are four rounds fired, well within the proposed 10 round limit.”

      Aren’t statistics great? Of those “average shootings”, how many involved firearms that only held 5 or 6 rounds? Wouldn’t that trend the results downward? Perhaps a more meaningful stat would be what percentage of available rounds were used. Or perhaps we should realize stats aren’t of any value when you’re being assaulted by an attacker or multiple attackers. Or that we have a Bill of Rights, not a bill of needs sometimes…

  12. Holy hell, this is extremely frustrating to watch. One of the panelists asks the Philly Mayor what percentage of murders are done with rifles, the Mayor responds that there were X number of murders with “guns”. Panelist asks for clarification, Mayor says “Handgun, Shotgun, Rifle…dead is dead”.

    When pressed further, Mayor admits that there were ZERO deaths in Philly via rifle in 2012 and none so far in 2013 (while also admitting that gun deaths were down significantly this year).

    • Well played by the panelist. Not only did he establish that rifles are not a gun violence issue in Philly, he also demonstrated that DiFi’s bill will accomplish nothing to reduce gun violence and that the Mayor was biased against and really wants to ban all guns. Major kudos. NRA should do an ad.

  14. Most of what Michael Nutter says does not make sense. It would be funny, if not so tragic.

    The AR15 “is not a self defensive weapon. It’s a self offensive weapon.” What? So it’s only used for suicides?

    • Nutter’s Police Commissioner is Charles Ramsey, who failed in DC, but hey, why let piss poor job performance get in the way

      • Ramsey recently said that Philadelphians getting Florida carry permits made them a threat as straw purchasers (note: carry permits are not required to purchase weapons in PA, nor do they help; totally separate process). Either stupid or dishonest (though I suppose he could be both).

        Why, by the way, do people on bother with Florida permits in shall-issue PA? Because Philly PD will deny based on subjective impressions during interview, parking tickets, and other illegal criteria. Damn glad our new progressive AG just closed that Florida “loophole.” Sorry, Philly residents, your at the mercy of Nutter and crew with no help from the AG.

  15. Been watching since the start. This Michael Nutter is so full of shit. Graham shredded him. He must have wrench dodging skills.

    Nutter is beyond a fraud. When asked if rifles where used in any of those crimes he replied with “83% of all homicides involved a gun” – To which Graham asked, how many of those involved rifles? Nutter replies “Well this year we’ve had 32 homicides involving firearms, of which 2 of them involved shotguns”

    *eye roll*

    • Hey then tried to say that in Philadelphia, the national average does not apply.

      Thats HILARIOUS. *slow clap*

      At least they didn’t show what .30-06 does to gel, or .338 Lapua, or 300BLK, or 7.62xN – See this .22 versus the Assault Weapon type .22 – Ha… Apples and oranges.

      Cho, used a Glock 9mm and a Walther P22… And a backpack full of magazines.

      The majority of the deaths, if I recall, where caused by the .22

      Gotta love when someone says “I’m not an expert, but I’m going to testify as one”

    • To which Graham asked, how many of those involved rifles? Nutter replies “Well this year we’ve had 32 homicides involving firearms, of which 2 of them involved shotguns”

      … and I was still hoping for some statement on rifles, but instead he finished off the above 32 homicide 2 shotgun statement with something like “so violence is a big problem in this city”, as if his ignoring the rifle count would make everyone else forget the man’s question.

    • Don’t live in Philly, but pay Philly salary tax. Makes me puke that part of my hard earned money is going to pay this clown’s salary.

  16. Y’know, climate deniers make me retch.

    Yeah, the rainbow means God’ll not again flood the world. Bully for Him. Only God can make a tree. Bully again.

    However, any moron can chop that tree down, and several billion morons can chop down a planet.

    I also don’t believe any flipping Rapture will save us all when the dirtball hits the fan, or before we run out of oil. The entire far-right wing agenda regarding the Future is short sighted at best, and likely much worse.

    An excellent illustration of this was “An Inconvenient Truth.” That’s a damned good title and phrase.

    Which gets me to the meat of this post, now that most of you are all riled up. and likely googling for my street address.

    That IS an excellent phrase, and one we should coopt.

    There are many complex, inconvenient truths about guns which don’t fit into the sanitized, “let’s all be normalized, complacent drones” idea of What a World Should Be as promulgated by the We’d Be Better Off Disarmed movement.

    Human – and subhuman – nature and behahiour being what they are, a well-armed populace is a Good Idea. Self discipline thrives when everyone carries ol’ Teddy’s fabled big stick.

    I would suggest tagging every incident of unambiguously Good gun use with the phrase “an inconvenient truth,” ’cause it is – at least to those who’d have us be a nation of sheeple.

    Report defensive gun use – via anonymous newspaper and library paste letters, if you must – so that the media will have something useful and balancing to disseminate to all the undecideds and fence sitters out there.

    Not that I’m trying to tell y’all what to do, mind you; I’m just sayin’.

    Russ, rabble pissing-off centrist

    • Trees grow back. When trees are cut for commercial purposes in most industrial Western nations, they are replanted. You need to talk to the “noble” savages in the 3rd world, they are the ones doing slash and burn.

      • I was simply addressing the rather moronic argument that “God made the world, so nothing as puny as humankind could possibly derail it.”

        It’s called a simile.

        I stand by it, and doubly by the second, gun related portion of my diatribe.

        • Technically, it’s highly unlikely that humanity will destroy the world. They may alter the environment such that it becomes inclimate to the life currently on it, but it’s unlikely they can destroy it. It’s self-regulating in that regard.

          Climate controls is not about saving the planet It’s about attempting to pin the planet into a consistent state, something that it just isn’t prone to doing. It’s people living below sea level and/or on a fault line who want to do the same thing 30 years from now that their parents did 30 years ago. Even if humanity was able to exist without causing any impact, the planet itself will change (not that we’re helping).

          I’m not against conservation of growth of resources (like replanting or harvesting procedures that are less environmentally destructive), but to think you’re going to continue to expand the human population, which continues to convert energy in inefficient methods, without causing some sort of environmental change is just asinine.

          Right now, “environmentally conscious” just means seeing if you can cram more chickens in the chicken house. This year they’re attempting to clip the legs and beaks from us, because we might possibly rage in the future when we realize living in a tiny metal box isn’t so much fun.

        • Fair enough, sir.

          However, “people” reading Genesis on the Senate floor as a part of their argument to fund Exxon rather that needed research does set me off.

          We can and should do better. An AR would be useful for protecting ones cache of canned goods three years after the Last Harvest, but creatures with brains shouldn’t let it get to that.

          If we’d stop outbreeding rats and work to make things good for our (reasonably numbered) grandkids…

          But anyway, “Inconvenient Truth?” No takers?

          Ah, well.

      • By the way, I do a lot of carpentry. I approve of wood.

        Simpson Redwood – and the U.S. wood industry, particuarly redwood – invented the entire idea of responsible forestry.

    • The link provided goes to the recording. You just have to scrub to about 20-25 min before is starts.

      • Damn! I sure wish an AR weighed more so as to be an effective club and came with a half metre bayonet – then it’d be useful in an evil-free way.

    • And just who the hell is she to tell me what is “necessary” and “unnecessary” anyway?????? This is the type of Holier than Thou dogshit I am sick to death of hearing. This hag has been entrenched in D.C. for so long she has delusions of superiority.

      Removal is the only way.

    • I like how the reporter destroys her position by simply mentioning that the number of murders committed with rifles (of any sort) is negligible compared to handguns.

    • ‘Dianne Feinstein: Semi-automatic weapons are unnecessary personal pleasures’

      http://www.examiner.com/article/dianne-feinstein-semi-automatic-weapons-are-unnecessary-personal-pleasures

      LOL… perhaps we should also point out that Jewelry (rings, necklaces, broaches, etc) are also unnecessary personal pleasures too… Oh, and so is going to designer clothing stores, hair dressers, etc.

      Wait… our families generations ago lived without the automobile, electricity, telephones, television, computers, and all that too… (we’re so spoiled we can’t imagine life without even half of that specifically listed in this part.)

      What most of them didn’t live without was a gun. Admittedly for hunting, but was also handy if the local law enforcement came around and deputized you, or you had to protect your source of food or your family. Fortunately, unless family was involved in some war, they didn’t have to fight off a corrupt government or its agents.

  24. I’m glad it seems to be going well. I just want to express my honest gratitude to those who watch things like this and record their observations. Thank you for sparing me the fist-clenching, tooth grinding, aggravation of having to watch it myself.

  25. I can’t watch this Dan. I grew up watching horror movies, they however didn’t prepare me for the “creature that grabs guns”. Thanks for the effort though Dan, Randy

  26. TTAG,
    Thanks for alerting us on this. I held my nose and watched it. I determined to listen with an open and unbiased mind. And, though I tried (really, I did) I did not hear one word of “testimony” that that would convince any objective, logical thinking person that a ban on so called “assault weapons” would in anyway, whatsoever, reduce gun crime. Just as I suspected. ZERO
    I did hear very effective challenges from the likes of Graham and others as O.o reported above.
    And, Di FI did say something to the effect that she “thought” the recently gun ban “started” to dry up the number of assault weapons out there … at the end” . (which said nothing about drying crime)
    Anyway, I’m pretty sure she gonna get called on that misstatement.
    Maybe by some of y’all?
    I have a few family members that are sold out on Obama/leftist religion/philosophy. (and , yes I have been thinking about having some DNA tests done :-0 )
    They don’t want to discuss this with me anymore because the only question I ask them to answer is: “How exactly are the ideas you propose going to stop ” criminal gun violence?” Ultimately, they can’t answer.
    You’ll have to keep bringing them down to earth as they try skirt the question and go off on statistics (most of the time they are wrong) and “this time it’s different” and “we have DO something … for the children” (BTW: when they say , “its for the children” you know they are running out of gas).
    But in the end if you keep pressing and pressing ” just answer the question”, they can’t.
    This hearing, stacked with ringers as it was, was no different.
    DJC

  27. David Hardy is an extremely sharp lawyer. His website is:

    http://armsandthelaw.com/

    He has posted the transcript of his remarks there, but there’s lots of good stuff there if you are interested in legal issues surrounding guns.

Comments are closed.