Senators Ted Cruz and Dianne Feinstein during a Senate Judiciary Hearing on Thursday got into heated exchange while discussing the California congresswoman’s proposed ban on so-called “assault” weapons.
“The question that I would pose to the senior senator from California is,” Cruz said, referring 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?” he added.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
Time to retire lady, 6th Graders have a lot more education than you.
ReplyDeleteAmendment II
ReplyDelete"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Passed by Congress, ratified by the States and authenticated by the Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson.
Dianne Feinstein is in direct violation of upholding her duty to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
This dialogue should not even be entertained on the floor of the peoples Capitol Building. Actions should be taken immediately to indict her and any Congressman or woman that supports this act of treason against the American people. (that includes O'Malley and most likely Ireton)
There probably will be Revolution if they succeed in their crime against the people.
Typical Progressive liberal hypocrites they are, when someone shoots someone they want to take from people that didn't do it. This is wrong.
They are not going to quit until they accomplish their goal as Obama stated, " I don't believe Americans should be allowed to own guns." This is the ideology of a COMMUNIST dictator not an American President.
Rise up!
Molon labe.
Maybe not a 6th grader but she proves she's a moron.
ReplyDelete7:47 - most of the true partiotic American public knew it a loooong time ago.
ReplyDeleteThe rest that keep reelecting her are the same ones that are putting the others on office too. We need more people to vote that have education and common sense!
Dracula looks better.
ReplyDeleteShe states in the video that the 'ban' exempts over 2,000 types of firearms.
ReplyDeleteShe says, "Is this not enough for the American people? Do they want bazookas? How many guns is enough?"
Ms. Feinstein, We The People want as many guns as we want. If we want to own a bazooka, we can.
The second amendment shall not be infringed.
It does not say there is a limit to the number of firearms allowed to be possessed.
It does not give the state the power to limit any such possession.
The Constitution of the United States of America was written, voted on and passed, to LIMIT THE GOVERNMENT. NOT the people.
If you want to disarm me, disarm the military and police first.
You can't do that you say? They would not be able to protect this country, and it's citizens?
Then why would you deny me the same right?
We all know the REAL reason behind such bans. The only 'safety' you and your cohorts are interested in is your own.
You professional politicians will stop at nothing to retain your positions and power.
The government does not issue rights, it was designed to PROTECT those rights from people such as yourselves.
Our rights came from God, or whatever the current popular PC term is nowadays.
WE gave YOU power, and WE can take away that power.
The created, (government), is trying to rule the creators, (the American people).
That was never the intention. AND it still is not.
It will never happen until such day as when a free man decides his mere life is more valuable than his freedom.
I am ready to die for mine. ARE ANY OF YOU?
Start taking them out in the street and hanging them. She has "studied" the Constitution? If so, she knows what she is doing is in direct contradiction to what it says. Uphold and defend the Constitution? How do these "leaders" keep from laughing as they take that oath? "...shall not be infringed" is pretty damn clear to me. But they were kind enough to exempt 2,000 guns. How nice of them. 1900 of them are single shot shotguns and bolt action rifles. If she is "reasonably educated" as she claims, she would know that Jefferson intended the Second Amendment to give the citizens the ability to overthrow tyrannical government. Not hunt or shoot targets. But to kill politicians who grow too pompous to live and govern. Its hard to resist the government when they send storm troopers with automatic weapons to blast citizens firing back with single shot shotguns. She's just another slimy, sniveling elitist politician who knows that somewhere in Heaven, Jefferson is hoping and praying that she gets a close up lesson in that particular freedom he so wisely put into law. She's doing her damndest to delay (thats right, delay) that very event.
ReplyDeleteIt's time we quit insulting our sixth graders with lowlife examples of crap like her.
ReplyDelete