Articles, Blog

New Senate Gun Control Bill to Include Handguns


but speaking of myths surrounding gun
control we talked about this chronicle of higher education article which
pointed out a lot of myths that are common to both the left and the right
about guns and gun control one of them is this idea that via santa an assault weapons ban or
assault weapons per se are really the the the problem here when
really when we look at homicide and the there the plurality of these crimes it’s
handgun mine and conservatives are now going
completely nuts about the plan from senator dianne feinstein democrat from
california in january and reduce a bill that would rei invigorate parts of the
assault weapons ban which has expired or also adding some new things and if you look at our web site you can
see a summary of the entire legislation includes a bunch of difference uh…
different stuff i might glad that handguns are included
in this yes a m however actually don’t see that much of
a reason for conservatives to flip out because there are so many workarounds as
there often are for example the bill would ban the sale transfer
importation or manufacturing of a hundred and twenty specifically
named firearms which includes rifles handguns so on and so forth the problem is that you can just say
okay well if this is the specific model then we can just work around that and
create new models we’ll give it a new name or giving unit now it could be got
law does go further because it bans all la of characteristics including
detachable magazine uh… military characteristics a lot of
different things which would say well it doesn’t matter if you’ve been if you’re
coming up a new models we’re going to ban a lot of particular
uh… traits here but between the amount of of products that will be
grandfathered in and the workarounds that manufacturers
will obviously come up with the idea that this is some kind of an
infringement on the second amendment is just silly the constitutional arguments
made no sense to me here it’s a well-regulated militia or any well that’s the other thing about that
is when we talk about well-regulated meet
on where you saying that a lot of people misinterpret the meaning of that i’ve heard that you have you know i mean
i thought i was regulations but the its regularly in the sense of uh… uh… acquit in other words right
out that the right amin on on the first person to say that uh… we need to
repeal the second amendment or have a fifth liberal justice on the supreme
court to change the opinions they decided that the believes they are in terms of what the founders man i
think it’s pretty clear well-regulated means well provision well armed right
now what does that fit the definition of being in a malicious let me read that in that part of it also
that it’s for part of the debate preserve its for a mullet though i actually think that the
language debate is somewhat of a distraction i understand that constitutional law uh… uh… fetish ests will get involved in the placement of a
comma and all of this antonin scalia stuff which determines what what exactly
was meant when this was originally written and
people say that i somehow hate the constitution when i say stuff like this
but to me the idea of analyzing commas when we’re
talking about firearms read and edit time were almost nothing
that now exists in the firearms world even was conceived of at the time it
just doesn’t seem that relevant to go after the commons well he could depending on what you may
be a definition of regulated means depending on what you definition of
militia means ninety if you were to go in be strict constitutionalist yeah and
find that a handgun never fits any of these
definitions right even if you’re still the entire constitutionalist you may
have to then say the comment in the right place in and well-regulated means
this and they’re inversely will have to ban handguns or assault what do you think about that it’s not i
mean how much you how where the is is this even really where the focus should
be on the on the the placement of commas in the constitutional i wish you were
the case that five people on the supreme court
determine what the policy will be for three hundred twenty million people but that’s what’s going on here if all you
know if we had a fifty liberal justice will break now we would be able to have
stringent controls on handguns and now we can but sometimes the beauty of the
constitution is in the minutiae the devil is in the details in this case
came up and all that the beauty of it sometime president leonard knight okay every agassi beauty is in the eye
of the beholder idle because they are the same words may protect some of the
the freedoms that you will that farewell
that money is getting to the key point here which is a it’s not about the
constitution is about how you interpreted and a what the way the policy is
determined by how these people interpret it that’s all that matters guess
identity legally that seems to be the only thing that matter and as we won
recently reinterpreted so that individual gun ownership is now under
the second amendment so there you have at the devil is in the details it’s just
that particular double that you don’t

98 thoughts on “New Senate Gun Control Bill to Include Handguns

  1. some compare mexico to iraq in violence "There is now only one legal gun store in Mexico in Mexico City and buyers must wait months for approval of purchase from the Ministry of Defense. Purchases are limited to small caliber, non-military weapons that must be kept at home; semi-automatic weapons are only sold to military and police" canada has a hell of a lot more gun stores than 1, and drugs do cause mass muder just think of gangs. and canada is much more rual so its less likely for mass muder

  2. I agree! That folks of rational mind do NOT need a gun to prove anything. Most gun owners do not own one for that purpose. I agree that some do but most don't. Most gun owners own firearms to protect themselve's from criminals. Believe it or not, Everyone can't live a super safe city. The day there are enough cops ( Which are being cut ) and criminals don't have guns anymore, gun owners will give up their guns. Can you provide that security for them?

  3. USA will never give up their guns. N E V E R ! If the US government attempts to ban guns from US citizens, America will be in Civil War. They can have my gun when they pry it from my cold dead fingers! fuck 'em!

  4. The Colt AR-15 is a semi-automatic(what most guns are) version of the M16 rifle which is produced for civilian sale and use. The military uses M16's which are full auto, there is a huge difference. AR-15's are designed for civilians for their use. They are used a lot for self defense, hunting, and target shooting. Again, they are not full auto like M16's, they are just regular rifles with the same look of an M16 but besides that they are completely different. Why can't people understand this?

  5. My beginning argument here was that the makers of this video left out half of the 2nd amendment (the part which says our right to keep & bear arm) and then acted as if it didn't exist and acted as if gun owners were talking about the other part of the 2nd amendment as the part guaranteeing their rights. It is easy to mislead people into thinking the 2nd amendment doesn't guarantee our rights to keep and bear arms when you don't even mention the part which states that. What are you saying?

  6. Shockingly when you take a firearm designed for semi auto and try and make it full auto you destroy its integrity and the gun will not last long or function very reliably. There is no easy way to turn guns like AR-15's full auto except if you swap out the receiver for a full auto one (the receiver is basically most of the gun, the entire mechanism, trigger, etc. and is the part registered) and full auto receivers (if legal) cost over 10K. Also you have to have all the strictly regulated licenses

  7. flood the US with 10s of millions of assault weapons and then ban them.does anyone see the black market problem with this?we will live in fear of gangsters and cartels not being able to equal their fire power.we will be terrorized like the citezens of Mexico.I dont trust the police to be there like superman to save my life.do you?

  8. You are not very intelligent David Pakman and you are a United States traitor.You fail to acknowledge & pay due respect to our founding Fathers who shed massive blood for the cause of freedom & liberty that you now enjoy. The fact that you sit your pathetic ass down in front of a micropone and make public your disrespect for our Constitution tells a lot about your character. You need to visit 3rd world nations run by dictators, you need to witness poverty 1st hand before you disrespect the USA!

  9. I was making the connection, that the UK is like DPK gun control wise. Gun controls /=/ type of government. The 2nd amendment has NEVER. EVER. been used to overthrow tyranny, so that argument is invalid.

  10. Yes, because having more guns actually makes things safer. That's why people who own a lot of guns, or have easy access to a lot of guns don't use them. Ohh Wait! That's not the case!

  11. Well REGULATED MILITIA Keywords REGULATED, MILITIA. Right of the people IN THE MILITIA to keep and bear arms.

  12. We are NOT a socialist nation! We are a free-market capitalist society which rewards those who try and who are competitive. Rewards such as financial gain, social-economic status, education, medicine, freedom of religious beliefs, the list goes on. If you recall, not too long ago, Germany, a broke nation gave rise to fascism. They murdered 6 million Jews, they were cleansing their own society of homosexuals, the medically impaired, etc all to build the master race. All because of the Fuhrer !

  13. it says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms." It does not say "The right of the militia to keep and bear arms." You completely left out the last part of the second amendment, get your facts straight

  14. This video confirms why I don't subscribe to you. Ban all guns? Maybe it's your youth, but you have a lot to learn. Democide. Don't think it couldn't happen here, you need to spend less time talking and more time researching.

  15. Take heed, gun rights activists. Most gun related deaths are suicides, which speaks volumes about the mentality of the gun-toting masses.

  16. And who do you think the militia is made up of? WE the PEOPLE!!! I so dislike having a battle of wits with an unarmed person. Now go back to you're kool-aid with the rest of the sheep and read a history book, then the constitution and finally the bill of rights. BY the time you're finished, it should all be over.

  17. "the right of the people" not the right of the militia. The second amendment enumerates more than one right, like the first amendment. The second amendment grants the right for citizens to form non government military forces, and the right of citizens to keep and bare arms.

  18. I don't intend to engage in a shoot out. My Xbow would deter the average person. A 150 # Xbow will shoot to 400 yards. Can't do a Sandy Hook with it.

  19. I cannot believe you just brought up Mexico.. Mexico gets most, if not all of their weapons from the US! If the US had tighter gun laws, then Mexico would not have as many weapons. There was even a whole incident where the US legally gave the Cartels assault weapons! It's disgraceful that you brought up Mexico like that.. it's like slapping Mexico across the face. The anti-drug war plus the US gun laws are mostly why Mexico is the way it is today. The Cartels even thanked the US…

  20. by the "incident" im guessing you mean fast and furious by president obama… who is anti-gun. that was his doing. and most beleive he did that to pass new gun laws and to ban guns.
    so if anti-gun people are willing to give guns to the cartels just to to have more "reasons" to pass anti-gun laws. how exactly do you think that giving guns to the bad guys is helping the good guys??

  21. Actually why don't you move to Israel or Yemen where you can walk around with machine guns. America doesn't need you.

  22. there is no work around when your father owns a weapon on the ban list. there is no work around when your grandfather owns a weapon that is on a ban list.. they are destroying the 2nd Amendment for Future Generations. stop being morally obtuse irrational losers. the 2nd Amendment cost them nothing to create and secure. so i think it should cost them their LIVES. do not allow these people to sit on radio and kill Children in Waco and Ruby Ridge with Laws.

  23. I think you both are a disgrace to this country. Please move your ass you Britain or China if you dont like are Constitution. Leave my Constitution alone. You dont belong in this wonderful country.

  24. Why kingofallwhites? What are you implying here?Sounds very racist to me. Maybe you should find a different forum to air your leftist opinions, yes? And by the way I would make Israel my first choice if I ever left America, but that ain't gonna happen, kingofallwhitesracistpeiceofshitkoolaiddrinker.

  25. He did things that were barely legal. He could fuck a 17 year old in some states and it wouldn't be illegal but it sure wouldn't look good either.

  26. Of course you would. Israel is the most racist state in the world, taking over on Apartheid where South Africa left off.

  27. The whole idea of a militia is that they are NOT regular army.
    When interpreting the Constitution, one MUST understand the meaning the Framers meant by it. Otherwise, changes in our language ever generation can lead to complete reversals of the meaning.

  28. Actually, Israel doesn't have apartheid. Arabs own property, are treated equally under the law, and are members of the nations parliament. And if you're talking about racist cultures, the most racist cultures in the world are the Japanese and the Koreans.

  29. You have no clue what you are talking about. You just spewed the bs that he Israelis tell people. First of all they are Palestinians. The Israelis try and force them to call themselves Arabs. Second of all they do NOT have full rights. In fact they control the population to maintain a Jewish majority.

  30. This kid is a fool, "infringed" means anything that interferes with by any degree. "Shall not be infringed" means it can't be interfered with at all, making even accepted regulations unconstitutional.

  31. The constitution is supposed to equalize the playing field. If civilians can't have it – the cops can't have it and the military can't have it. It's as simple as that.

  32. You'll remember I said this when your lil ass is in a fema camp getting water boarded and the thought brings me great pleasure! lmao!

  33. I bet this show would be really popular in North Korea….if the people there only had the freedom to hear it. What a couple of morons.

  34. "They were meant to be an organized STATE ARMY, a National Guard"
    –Wrong. If that were the case, the 2nd Amdt would state it. You're saying the Framers were forgetful or made a mistake? FYI, the Nat'l Guard is regular military, with uniforms, formal indoctrination in the ranks, pay, legal requirements, ranks, uniform code of conduct, military trials, etc. How is that a militia?
    "The Military deals with National and foreign situations"
    –No, the Army/Navy deals ONLY with foreign engagements.

  35. What the pro-gun right fails to realize is that the 2nd Amendment does not allow for you to have any type of gun you want, any quantity, and for any reason. If you bothered to look over the Heller case, the Supreme Court has explicitly stated that guns can be regulated and that the 2nd Amendment is not absolute.

  36. If they had a 2nd amendment in North Korea, and the gusto to use it, perhaps they would have the freedom to hear it!

  37. The 2nd does not allow you to own a personal nuclear arsenal or fighter jets without special approval, i.e. military contractor. Heller and the subsequent McDonald vs Chicago decision bans states from denying 2nd amendment rights through overregulation. The two decisions also protect the right of citizens to own firearms which are commonly used at the time, which presumably includes those with detachable magazines of over ten rounds capacity, unfettered by onerous state or federal regulations.

  38. There are states in the USA with easy gun laws and very low violent crime of all types, with no school shootings. This is due to those states willingness to stand up to criminals and put them in their place. They recognize the right of the people to be free from unwarranted search and seizure by anyone and they allow the people to enforce that right without fear of retribution by or on behalf of criminals. It is not wrong for a good person to stop a criminal with overwhelming force.

  39. We all have the right to bear arms commensurate with the small arms in military use, and in common use at the time, according to the recent Heller decision by the Supreme Court. This includes the AR-15, 9mm Glock, both with 20 or 30 round clips, six guns, 454 Casul 5 shot, musket, blunderbuss, pump action or semi auto 12 gauge, etc. If you want to reduce crime, then declare open season on criminals in the act of committing crime and stop punishing victims for defending themselves.

  40. Thanks for your interpretation of the 2nd amendment. How about your interpretation of the 1st amendment. Do you think the Founding Fathers had what now passes for 'entertainment' in mind for protection under the 1st amendment? Gun control, brought to you by the same people in charge of the war on drugs. How's that working out? How about a plan that targets the criminals? Why do we let people smoke cigarets, not save for retirement or ride motorcycles? Crime control not gun control!

  41. I don't think this is quite a red versus black conflict as both sides including the most extreme Liberal Left have guns as legal owners. I think that you are either really missing the point or just part of the sales force playing your clever word games.

  42. first off please watch what you say, the 2nd amendment is there for the citizens to protect them self's from oppression ether from internal or external, and since you didn't quote only your agenda I might also point out that this is only more of same, the government is trying to take down the constitution and leave us defenseless, you should look at WWII from Germany then look at operation paper clip, then look at all the control diversions made in that time line till now.

  43. the US treats its citizens like the enemy not citizens. Russia and Japan wouldn't invade the us do to this point, nor could the government take total control and down the constitution, with the people armed as well, to understand this look at the cdc, and fema and its main function, if you ever thought that fema was other than crowd control, only to in camp us citizens then you should go back how it was made. has nothing to do with mission statement, but your not looking and reading from script.

  44. Au contraire. People like me are lovers of freedom and liberty, and are the only thing standing between your blissful ignorance and complete tyranny.

  45. What part of "Shall not be infringed" don't you understand.

    It does not matter what weapons have been invented in the last 225 years. The founding father want the people to have an even playing field with a tyrannical government.

    You can not have a well regulated militia if tyne people don'y haver access to their firearms and are proficient with them.

  46. The problem is not handguns. The problem is criminal acts cared out by evil people. Do you understand that without the 2nd amendment you would not be able to exercise the 1st?

  47. You guys might want to research "Radio free Europe" and get an understanding of how Communist countries that had Gun control went after the media's fee speech. Try to understand how easily your voices could be silenced by a tyrannical government. This is more than a emotional huggie-freelie PC topic.

  48. The biggest thingis if the british banned all guns in the colonies how would the revolutionary war turned out? Does the weird massacre ring a bell?

  49. these stupid fucks and everyone like them are completely brain dead. some 16 year old boy was stabbed to death in public in the uk by 15 sword and kitchen knife wielding gang members. there is nothing you morons can do to get rid of guns. they will always be around as long as we live on a earth which has natural material that can be used to make them. the only solutions that exist are to arm more people, ban these pharmaceutical drugs that cause these mass shootings, stop the war on drugs

  50. to end most gang violence, and give the mental health system a complete overhaul.
    at least those are the main solutions. there are more, but a gun ban will definitely not help. it will make matters much much worse. you anti-gun people can ignore history and the facts all you want but the truth still stands.

  51. it is suspected that Luis Garavito (the serial killer) killed up to 400 children with nothing more then a knife. had the chinese guy cut those kids jugular vein in their necks they all would have been dead
    and it would have been a much more painful drawn out death then a bullet to the head. there are people who have been shot dozens of times and still survived just like there have been people stabbed dozens of times and still survived. the only difference is where these nuts aimed. FBI stats

  52. show that far more people are stabbed to death then are shot to death with a rifle. violence in America has gone down by nearly 50%
    in just a few short years and guess what? gun sales have been going through the roof hitting crazy record highs the whole time!!!
    these mass shootings almost always happen in "gun free zones"
    where law abiding citizens are not allowed to carry firearms. if guns were allowed in these areas the shooters either wouldn't commit the crime or they would be dead after

  53. firing one shot. another interesting fact is that 99% of these mass shooters were on the pharmaceutical drug Prozac or other highly dangerous drugs like it. i was prescribed it years ago. i know from first hand experience how dangerous they are. i know for a fact they are directly responsible for hundreds of thousands of murders and suicides. maybe even millions. if anybody in the government who are calling for gun control truly cared about the children, they would stop murdering them with the

  54. drugs they made legal. if Obama cared about the children he would stop blowing thousands of them to pieces in drone strikes in other countries calling their deaths "collateral damage" just to get 1 or 2 terrorists amongst them. the government does not care, the people within the government are not calling for gun control to keep us safe, its the exact opposite. they have an entirely different agenda.

  55. why would anyone take an interpretation of the constitution from some snot nosed brats, fresh out of their socialist education center? You liberals have a lot to learn about what freedom is and the risks and rewards associated with it. Power requires responsibility, even if it mean you're responsible for your own safety. Never let some elite puppet tell you how to live.

  56. HEY DO ANY OF YOU KNOW WHAT SHELL NOT INFRINGE MEAN SO CARS KILL MORE SO YOU CANT DRIVE TUCKS WITH MILATRY TYPE PANIT BUT I CAN ———– YOU DO WHAT YOU WANT WITH YOUR RIGHTS BUT ILL STAND UP FOR US YOU TO ITS NOT ABOUT THE GUN THEY ARE JUST TOOLS WITH HUMAN HELP THEY CANT GO OFF STOP TALKING AND LOOK THE PONIT IS THE FREEDOM OF BUYING WHAT EVER THEY WANT AS LONG AS THEY DONT HERT OR DAMAGE SOMEONES STUFF COMMON LAW

  57. this whole left right thing is for divide and conquer, im not bias, but you do realize the most liberal president Franklin D. Roosevelt married his own cousin

  58. i think its funny how some people think it is their right to make decisions for everyone else, this kid makes me sick – i hate to generalize party but- its obvious to me that is whats going on here -to him it is an attack on republicans because that's the way the party blinded think. He is thinking lets hurt republicans by forcing legislation that "they" don't want – lets play with the constitution to hurt "them" but its not about them, its about the liberty of the people of the "united" states

  59. "On every occasion [of Constitutional interpretation] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying [to force] what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, [instead let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
    – Thomas Jefferson

  60. "The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
    – Thomas Jefferson

  61. what the fuck who care what the gay world think if you do not want a gun don't get one don't forget this is the US the Constitution is not to be played with you guys will not be happy till you see every one dead

  62. I could care less either way but facts are facts making these changes will make no change in anything other than people loosing there rights.

  63. I don't read the constitution. But I can tell you this. The government knows this, the economy is worse than screwed, it is FUBAR. The sudden ban on guns is actually a pre-emptive strike against the people so that we can't go all whacko after the super rich when we finally realized where all our wealth has gone to. They know, that we will, very soon figured out who indeed actually have stolen our lives. MAKE THIS CLEAR, BAN ON GUNS IS A PREEMPTIVE STRIKE TO PROTECT THE THIEVES.

  64. So the Supreme court is awful unless you have people on your side the majority? Why do you want guns taken from citizens? Look at chicago, stict gun laws and higher crime. What makes you think that taking peoples right to self defense will make us all safe. It is the stupidest argument ever.

  65. Nuclear weapons and military jets are weapons which cannot be owned by anyone, other than government or approved contractors with appropriate contractual obligations and permissions. The Heller and McDonald decisions affirm the people's right to own any small(<50cal, or 600,700nitro, all shotguns) manual or semi-auto firearms in common use, free of onerous government regulations. Regulations cannot be allowed to trump our constitution, otherwise government can trample all of our rights.

  66. You are so correct! I am always amazed by the people who form anti gun opinions first and then try to fit facts to their opinions. There is a reason why the USA is alone in the world as a truly free country. Unfortunately, that freedom is constantly being attacked by both public servants and wealthy private power brokers who would make us more like ancient Rome or perhaps one of the totalitarian dictatorships portrayed in a number of sci fi movies.

  67. What's really scary is that there are the odd super rich individuals who want to have their own private armies but are thankfully prevented from doing so, at least in most of the industrialized or first and second worlds. The upper classes have, however become way too powerful through personal information acquisition and control, as well as the usual financial and political control.

  68. I am actually more concerned about private snooping due to the unearned power it gives to those who do it. The NSA has a tough time using the information they gather against me unless they can prove a criminal pattern and turn the information over to proper authorities for prosecution. A private company does not have the same constraints. They can render one incapable of being employed, loan worthy, etcetera, without the benefit of a trial. All this through private information control.

  69. How does banning guns benefit a law abiding citizen. since they are the ones obeying the laws. Criminals do not, it doesn't matter how many laws you make you can't stop criminals from doing what they want.

  70. Whew, a lot of dislikes up in this mug, and rightfully so. Talk about people speaking on things they know nothing about hah. What's up with liberals using the word "fetishist" and "ammo-sexual" anyways? What do they have against sexual orientations that they have to legislate against such?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *