Nothing to worry about.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an out right ban,
picking up every one of them... "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in,
"I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here."
--U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), CBS-TV's "60 Minutes," 2/5/95

"Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe."
--U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein Associated Press 11/18/93

I came across these quotes the other day. I was told it was dishonest to interpret these statements to mean that Senator Feinstein wanted to ban all guns. How else is one supposed to interpret "every one of them" and "turn 'em all in"? Maybe her opinion has changed, if it has, I'd be interested in seeing some more recent quotes. I do find it disingenuous to tell the gun owning democrats here that they have nothing to worry about when prominent members of our party have made statements like the ones above. I hope everyone has a happy and safe new year.

David

[varkam]

1. To be fair...

those quotes are a bit aged, and just because one member of a group says something doesn't mean that all members of the group share that same opinion.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

7. I agree.

I even said I'd like some more recent quotes. I just think it's dishonest to accuse people here of paranoia when members of our party feel this way.

David

[tularetom]

2. Well let's see you can spend all your time in a snit about things that ain't gonna happen

or you can spend it getting pissed off about a 2 minute speech some asshole is gonna give.

Or you can actually LIVE your life without being afraid or pissed.

Feinstein is a wart on the Democratic party. Her statement is moot in light of Heller. Ignore her.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

8. Just think it's dishonest to call people here paranoid with statements like this on record.

I think Obama's to smart to push for an AWB, I can't say the same thing about Sen. Feinstein.

David

[aikoaiko]

3. The first quote was in an interview about the AWB.

I went back at one point and found the transcript and I realized that "every one of them" referred to guns listed in the 1994 AWB.

Its still a loathsome quote even when properly contextualized.

eta: And yes, you are correct that anyone who cares about the right to keep and bear arms should be very concerned about Senator Feinstein (and every other legislator who has sponsored or cosponsored) a bill banning even one gun from civilian ownership). We've shown in recent elections that its possible to elect pro-rkba Democrats.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

5. See that wasn't hard.

Thanks for the important and relevant information.

David

[iverglas]

4. to be truthful

The first quote is about ASSAULT WEAPONS, and refers to the fact that the legislation under discussion GRANDFATHERED the firearms then being prohibited for sale, i.e. continued to allow the possession of those then owned.

To be fair TO THE MEMBERS OF THIS FORUM, and to democratic discourse in general, it is time that this dishonest representation of Feinstein's statement stopped.


How else is one supposed to interpret "every one of them" and "turn 'em all in"?

One is supposed to get one's head out of the ass of the right wing, and do one's own investigation in order to find the correct interpretation. One can start RIGHT HERE IN THIS FORUM.

If you have actually not been present in a discussion here where the TRUTH has been presented, you just haven't been trying. But isn't it funny how the quotations you have provided are formatted in exactly the same way they are most times they're puked up here - and in pretty much every right-wing cesspool where they're regularly puked up?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=132720&mesg_id=132749
just for instance.


Now it's your turn. I'm not familiar with the context in which the second statement was made. Do the necessary investigation and tell us. Unless and until you do that, you are simply not telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Offhand, I would have to agree that "Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe". I would also see no reason whatsoever to infer from that statement that Diane Feinstein supports a policy of BANNING ALL FIREARMS. Certainly, if I say "Fish is disgusting", I hope that no one will pretend to infer that I support banning the eating of fish.


... So I just did the research. Let me help you.

The date on the quotation is 11/18/93, your funny US way of writing November 11, 1993.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=103&session=1&vote=00375
(editing to add my emphasis)

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 103rd Congress - 1st Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Amendment (Feinstein Amdt. No. 1152 )
Vote Number: 375
**Vote Date: November 17, 1993, 10:10 AM**
Required For Majority: 1/2
Vote Result: Amendment Agreed to
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 1152 to S.Amdt. 1151 to S. 1607
Statement of Purpose: To restrict the manufacture, transfer, and possession of certain semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices.
Vote Counts:
YEAs 56
NAYs 43
Not Voting 1

Gosh. I wonder whether her statement might have been related to ... wait for it ... the ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN.

Has Feinstein ever introduced legislation to ban, oh, shotguns or handguns?

I didn't think so.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

6. If you had posted that the first time instead of calling me dishonest this thread wouldn't exist.

[iverglas]

9. if you spent less time digging around in right-wing cesspools

You would not have posted it the first time.

Which was approximately the brazillionth time it's all been posted in this forum, of course.

[iverglas]

10. deleted - posted wrong place

[iverglas]

11. you might want to retract that allegation

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=194922&mesg_id=195023

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=194922&mesg_id=195126

Why is it that you can never refer to what someone else has said without misrepresenting it?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

Thanks you seem to be calling me dishonest in both of the statements you linked to.

If you were somehow implying that I'm honest feel free to clarify.

David

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

12. Thanks you seem to be calling me dishonest in both of the statements you linked to.

If you were somehow implying that I'm honest feel free to clarify.

David

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

13. Pokerstars double post sorry.

[benEzra]

14. Speaking of all guns the gun-ban lobby calls "assault weapons" and all guns holding over 10 rounds.

Which isn't all guns, just the most popular ones. Of course, she'd get less of a backlash if she tried to outlaw hunting, but the architects of the "assault weapon" hysteria weren't exactly known for rational calculation on that point.

As I've pointed out before, the Moral Majority never wanted to outlaw all books, either, just the ones they found subversive, and Operation Rescue doesn't want to ban all abortions, just those not necessary to save the life of the mother. Even the alcohol prohibitionists didn't want to ban all alcohol, just recreational beverages, and not even all of those (near-beer under 0.5% ethanol was OK).

I'm sure Ms. Feinstein would "allow" you to own a bolt-action deer rifle or a skeet shotgun, at least until the VPC starts bleating about .30-caliber military-style sniper rifles and .73 caliber riot guns. If like most gun owners you don't hunt or shoot skeet, well, too bad.

[Doug.Goodall]

15. The '51 votes' quote is about military style weapons

It is disingenuously for both sides of the gun control issue to argue this as anything else but what Senator Feinstein meant.

However, now that the Democrats have regained their place running the Government, it is time to revisit the gun control issue.

Some of us Democrats would like to see more and wider ranging gun control. After watching the news over Christmas about several horrific shootings, I can't help but think there are too many guns in private ownership, and too many idiots with easy access to guns.

[benEzra]

16. Broader than that, actually.

In context, she was speaking of all guns covered by the VPC's "assault weapon" meme (which includes many non-military-looking firearms) plus all detachable-magazine civilian firearms holding over 10 rounds.

Of course, when you get down to it, most civilian firearms from the Brown Bess musket to the present were "military style" at some point. The most popular deer rifle in the USA is the .30-06 military caliber, military style bolt-action, derived from the German Mauser infantry rifle and sequelae, although when the gun-ban lobby uses the term these days, they are primarily referring to civilian autoloaders with handgrips that stick out.

Rifles are almost irrelevant to the U.S. gun violence picture, FWIW.

[one-eyed fat man]

17. Brady fails.............

From the DOJ: 2006 numbers for background checks done under NICS,

8,000,000 plus checks
125,000 denials
and a whopping 73 convictions.

That is way up from 1994 when the Attorney General testified to 12 prosecutions and 4 convictions out of 3 million checks.

One would suspect that if there were a convict left who didn't know there is a check when you buy a gun they must be dumber than a post. So unless they are just checking to see if they are in the database, why would they try to buy from a legitimate dealer?

But looking at the the numbers from 2006, seems like if you are a crook the odds of going to jail for trying to buy a gun aren't as good as getting a winning lottery ticket.

[iverglas]

18. almost

It is disingenuously for both sides of the gun control issue to argue this as anything else but what Senator Feinstein meant.

Actually, it is totally dishonest for gun militants and other opponents of firearms control measures to represent the statement as meaning what it does not mean.

I've never seen firearms control advocates represent it as anything other than what it is.

[rangersmith82]

19. Senator Feinstein wishes to ban all semi auto rifles

I think she would be ok with people having single shot 22 rifles, therefore she wouldn't totally be against the 2nd amendment.

[iverglas]

20. anytime you have something to say

that is remotely relevant to the topic of the thread, or the post to which you choose to respond, you feel free now, y'hear?

[rangersmith82]

21. No I was just Stateing the Senator

Wanted to ban semi auto rifles, but could allow people to have single shot rifle's to appear she isn't Anti gun.

Thanks for you advice, but I will pass.

[iverglas]

22. just stating not the whole truth

No I was just Stateing the Senator
Wanted to ban semi auto rifles, but could allow people to have single shot rifle's to appear she isn't Anti gun.

The Senator wanted to ban precisely what the legislation banned, would be my own inference.

That is: SOME semi-automatic rifles (and some handguns), as I understand it.

Do you have some basis for saying what you said?

Do you have some basis for ascribing the motive to Feinstein that you have ascribed?

Didn't think so. Particularly, in the latter case, since it didn't even make sense.