From Fox News.
The leader of the Democrat-controlled Senate on Tuesday dropped a proposed assault weapons ban from the chamber’s gun-control package – dealing a blow to supporters of the ban, though it could still come up for a vote.
The sponsor of the measure, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., revealed that Reid told her the proposed ban would not be in the initial package. Feinstein said she’s “disappointed” with the decision, and is expected to nevertheless offer it as an amendment.
But the move by Reid to cut it from the main bill signals a lack of congressional support for a proposal that would not only revive, but strengthen, the decade-long ban that expired in 2004.
Check out Ted Cruz’s take down of Feinstein’s vapid intellect and her subsequent displeasure:
“The question that I would pose to the senior senator from California is,” said Cruz to Feinstein, “Would she deem it consistent with the Bill of Rights for Congress to engage in the same endeavor that we are contemplating doing with the Second Amendment in the context of the First or Fourth Amendment, namely, would she consider it constitutional for Congress to specify that the First Amendment shall apply only to the following books and shall not apply to the books that Congress has deemed outside the protection of the Bill of Rights? Likewise, would she think that the Fourth Amendment’s protection against searches and seizures could properly apply only to the following specified individuals and not to the individuals that Congress has deemed outside the protection of the Bill of Rights?
“I’m not a sixth grader,” said Feinstein. “Senator, I’ve been on this committee for 20 years. I was a mayor for nine years. I walked in, I saw people shot. I’ve looked at bodies that have been shot with these weapons. I’ve seen the bullets that implode. In Sandy Hook, youngsters were dismembered. Look, there are other weapons. I’ve been up — I’m not a lawyer, but after 20 years I’ve been up close and personal to the Constitution. I have great respect for it. This doesn’t mean that weapons of war and the Heller decision clearly points out three exceptions, two of which are pertinent here. And so I — you know, it’s fine you want to lecture me on the Constitution. I appreciate it. Just know I’ve been here for a long time. I’ve passed on a number of bills. I’ve studied the Constitution myself. I am reasonably well educated, and I thank you for the lecture.”
“I walked in, I saw people shot!” Really, DiFi? Except that Dan White shot George Moscone and Harvey Milk with a .38-caliber revolver, not one of those scary “assault weapons” that has your panties in a fucking wad.
She’s still pissed off that the Supreme Court upheld the Second Amendment in District of Columbia v. Heller.
The non-sixth grader has a very limited, if any, understanding of the Constitution. The Dems constantly look for ways to circumvent or simply violate the articles and amendments in the document. And they really hate getting lectured on the rights they infringe.
- Feinstein Knows Her Enemy, The Constitution: Assault Weapons Ban To Get Full Senate Vote (personalliberty.com)
- Overlooked snippet from Dianne Feinstein’s evasive response to Ted Cruz reveals her true agenda (directorblue.blogspot.com)
- Feinstein’s Defense of Her ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban: I Feel, Therefore I Legislate (reason.com)
- Sheriff Cruz Meets School Marm Feinstein (americanthinker.com)
- Ted Cruz hits back at Scarborough for ‘willfully ignorant’ remarks [VIDEO] | The Daily Caller