I contacted Dian Finestine

s2harry

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
228
Reaction score
110
Location
Commifornia
I sent Finestine and all the others one of the Support Gun Rights letters...she answered....

"Mass shootings are a serious problem in our country, and I have watched this problem get worse and worse over the 40 years I have been in public life. From the 1966 shooting rampage at the University of Texas that killed 14 people and wounded 32 others, to the Newtown massacre that killed 20 children and 6 school teachers and faculty, I have seen more and more of these killings. I have had families tell me that they no longer feel safe in a mall, in a movie theater, in their business, and in other public places, because these deadly weapons are so readily available. These assault weapons too often fall into the hands of grievance killers, juveniles, gangs, and the deranged.
I recognize that the Second Amendment provides an individual right to bear arms, but I do not believe that right is unlimited or that it precludes taking action to prevent mass shootings. Indeed, in the same Supreme Court decision that recognized the individual right to bear arms , District of Columbia v. Heller , the Court also held that this right, like other constitutional rights, is not unlimited. That is why assault weapons bans have consistently been upheld in the courts, both before and after the Heller decision. I believe regulation of these weapons is appropriate. she said she gets letters from citizens pleading for gun laws and gun bans and there are far too many mass killings. These assault weapons need to be banned."
She didnt say anything about listening to pro gun folks statistics or people defending themselves
just gun haters and crybabies. 1966? Whitman? are you kidding me? He had no AK or AR. No cops had guns that could reach him just CITIZENS RIFLES. Just what does she consider a useable weapon for defense? 5 shot 38 against a mob of rioters burning down the city? So she will continue with her attack on gun rights. Her opinion matters more than ours. None of them care Obama to the last one of them dont care one lousy bit. (we already know that) They are in power and they intend to use that power HOWEVER they want. YOU DONT MATTER your nothing but a bank to drain for their uses. How does that make you feel? HR
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
She has her agenda...and we have ours. The second amendment and not to be infringed means what it says , it is absolute and we the people are the enforcers of the Constitution. It is we the people that have fought all of this countries battles and it is "We the people that will guard against tratiors that would infringe on the second amendment" They can not take what we will not give them...They can not take our rights from us, we would have to agree to give thme up...and many of us that have fought for this country are not about to roll over for this government or any government that thinks they can take our freedom. If the government is willing to kill me to get my guns....then the government needs to be checked and we have that ability to do just that. People are not buying AR's in record numbers for nothing. This is a road that the government will not go down....or they will "go down" Freedom is the only thing worth fighting for...Rally to the cause and hope we never have to defend it.
 
You need to ask Finkstein why she and all of the other GUN HATERS have their own personal ARMED SECURITY for themselves and their famalies that is paid for by US!!!
I say if she wants a gun ban then she should do the noble thing and propose a bill to take away all paid GUNS from all politicians.
I don't know about any of you but I cannot pay for my own personal security and I by GOD will not let my family be defenceless!!!!
 
She should have been voted out of office the first time she pushed for gun bans. From the movie that I saw about the shooter in Texas he had tried to get help numerous times but he never got any . If it had not been for people in town with hunting rifles he would have shot more people. They want our guns and it does not matter that we have not caused a problem to any one they want us to pay the price for what some coward has done.All of these shooters claim they are crazy
but they all go where their is no one armed to do their cowardly deeds.
 
If her letter were made into a video, it would depict Feiney with her fingers in her ears while yelling, "LA LA LA LA LA LA LA..... I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!"
 
With all due respect to the Senator's office - Please,take ALL your med's Senator so you can come back from where ever you are.
 
With all due respect to the Senator's office - Please,take ALL your med's Senator so you can come back from where ever you are.

Either that or she needs to stop taking her meds so her head will clear.
 
She also stated today that "Veterans should not be exempt from an assault weapons ban because they MIGHT have PTS...".
 
Last edited:
So why does she not have the courage to propose an outright ban and confiscation

People will accept nearly anything if it is introduced incrementally. We naturally assess our losses, or the severity of the situation from the last increment vs. the initial condition. Look how far they've already come from a discussion on "assault weapons"... now they are talking freely about removing guns from homes.. first from those "who deserve it ("..accused of violent domestic crimes.." not convicted.. accused..) to set a precedent and soften the response down the line. If those first people don't create a huge scene or a wiser legal challenge, it will continue until someone does.
 
Someone should ask Fienstien how she felt about ICE releasing Illegal felons in CA.

To Feinstein, they're called Democratic voters...

So why does she not have the courage to propose an outright ban and confiscation

People will accept nearly anything if it is introduced incrementally. We naturally assess our losses, or the severity of the situation from the last increment vs. the initial condition. Look how far they've already come from a discussion on "assault weapons"... now they are talking freely about removing guns from homes.. first from those "who deserve it ("..accused of violent domestic crimes.." not convicted.. accused..) to set a precedent and soften the response down the line. If those first people don't create a huge scene or a wiser legal challenge, it will continue until someone does.

This is exactly it. They know it can't happen all at once, so they will do it a little at a time.
 
Thats the same letter that someone else got that wrote to her....she really cares :rolleyes:
 
Ok, so I decided to do more. I sent Senator Feinstein an email protesting her agenda & pointing out that "shall not be infringed" means exactly what it says, etc. I quickly received an auto reply saying that she does not respond to out of state contacts, you must have a CA postal address. Well, I don't want to hear from her that badly, as in not a chance I would ever consider moving there. So, there you have it. She can file legislation that infringes the rights of people in all 50 states, but has no obligation to respond to 49 of them.
 
Harry, the bottom line is if its unconstitutional we also ignore it because its not a law. Not to be infringed is pretty simple for most of us to understand. Maybe its a good thing that this is happening now because we need to make some changes in who is allowed to run for elected office. I think a background check as detailed as ones we have to go through to work on nuclear submarines and a test to see if they understand the Constitution ...and if they can not pass muster....they can not even run for office. Its a shame that there are politicions that can not pass the background check to buy a firearm.....but they are allowed to propose bills that violate the Constitution. We need change and we need it yesterday. Also any politicion that proposes bills that are unconstitutional needs to answer to the people for their actions and face some kind of penalty, because they know better and they are not above the law. They need to be held responsible for their actions just as we are held responsible for our actions.
 
Thanks Buffalohunter. It continues to amaze me that they are not listening. But, I don't know how to change that in a state where I don't live or vote.
 
Rand Paul quoted something near and dear at C-PAC. He said "when we understand that power corrupts..and that absolute power corrupts absolutely.." [then we will understand why our government is structured the way it is and what must be done to keep it that way]. I'm always rooting for the kids that get it. Our world and time is fading.. and they have to figure out how to keep the real thing alive and balanced in their own way.
 
Back
Top