Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) speaks next to a weapons display during a Capitol Hill news conference on Jan. 24, 2013 (Getty Images)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) made sure to go through the proper channels when she displayed 10 so-called assault weapons during Thursday’s unveiling of her new proposed gun ban — lest she run afoul of Washington, D.C.’s strict gun laws.
Feinstein’s office, apparently mindful of the situation NBC’s David Gregory found himself in, asked D.C. Police to provide them with weapons to display, Feinstein spokesman Brian Weiss told the Washington Post. Such guns are permitted in D.C. if they are in police custody, Weiss said.
According to the Post:
U.S. Capitol Police and the Senate Sergeant at Arms inspected the weapons to ensure they were inoperable before they were permitted inside the Dirksen Senate Office building for the event, according to Weiss and Capitol Police spokesman Shennell Antrobus.
“We routinely work with our stakeholders during the course of their duties, and within the framework of the various applicable laws, to ensure the weapons brought in for hearings are done so in a safe manner,” Antrobus said in an e-mail.
D.C. police investigated Gregory after he held up what he said was a high-capacity ammunition magazine on live TV during “Meet the Press.” It’s a violation of District law to possess a magazine capable of holding 10 or more rounds of ammunition, but the D.C. attorney general ultimately decided not to prosecute.
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (176)
patriotsofworkingamerica
Jan. 27, 2013 at 3:24pmSo they went to all this trouble to have hearings against our Constitution?
Report this comment
redfish52
Jan. 27, 2013 at 1:38pmI have been doing some research on the Newtown School Massacre. I was home and watched all day and I know that way to many strange things happened that day to make me go hmmmm. I know CBS said the AR was found in Adam’s car and that he entered the school with 4 pistols and not the 2 first reported. Also he didn’t have a lot of time in the school before law officers showed up so are you telling me that this untrained guy (going to the range with mom does not constitute training) could do the damage that he did with only a couple of “wounded victims”. I’m sorry I own an AR that is semi-automatic and I can see no way that I could do what he did in that short of time. Also, the .223 is a fast round that unless he was hitting mass on every shot I just can’t see it. I do believe Adam was the shooter, I do believe he did not use an AR but rather the pistols and if the blood and carnage is what they claim it was I would say he used the shotgun with buck shot. With no one rushing him he could have easily reloaded and would not have had to have been that accurate. I’m sorry, their are just way to many inconsistencies to believe he use the AR. I also understand the car that he supposedly took to the school was not registered to him or his family but rather to a very sketchy character with a long police record which might explain the second shooter theory and the police surrounding the man in the woods. I’m not a conspiracy freak but I’m saying this dog just ain’t hunting.
Report this comment
P4cooler
Jan. 27, 2013 at 1:22pmLook at Americans as an armed people. It is part of our proud heritage and of course the 2nd Amendment of our great nation. Only tyrants would strip this away from us. Those Democrats who DARE support gun control will be voted out of office in the 2014 midterms. America is waking up, even a large number of low information voters.
Report this comment
corsair18
Jan. 27, 2013 at 1:11pmAnswer to the question…Because she is part of the ruling class. If George Washington were alive today he would be physically ill at what the city that bears his name has become. It is a boom town of power ,money and corruption. It is a modern day Rome….exactly what Washington and the founding fathers wanted to avoid. When the next world war starts, a bomb on this town might not be all bad.
Report this comment
DefyTYRANNY
Jan. 27, 2013 at 12:04pmDon’t question her! She is above the law! Those laws are for you, not them. If you displayed those firearms in that state, the SWAT teams would be combing your property for days and you wouldn’t see the light of day for many years.
Report this comment
CulperGang
Jan. 27, 2013 at 11:29amAs a Jew you would think she would know better, than to peddle the tripe she is peddling.
As my uncle said, “Some of those 6 million Jews ARMED would have made a huge difference.”
Here is Hitlers edict on gun control. He banned Jews from owning guns.
http://constitutionalistnc.tripod.com/hitler-leftist/id14.html
Feinstein is doing EXACTLY what Hitler did to Jews/Dissidents.EXACLTY!!!!
LOCK HER UP!!!! (for her own good) TRAITOR! and would be enslaver of humanity!!
Report this comment
redfish52
Jan. 27, 2013 at 10:59amSunday morning and I just finished screaming at the TV after watching Feinstein just tell the biggest lie yet in the gun debate. She said that I can now buy a sliding stock that will magically turn my AR into a fully automatic weapon. My question to her is this: Were can I buy one of these? Because I want one….no wait…as a responsible gun owner with a CCL I know that it is a serious Federal Crime to turn my AR into fully auto weapon without going through an extensive background check, local law enforcement approval and a very expensive license. How can she get away with lie’s like this? Luckily Ray Kelly came on after and said that its not the military type weapons that are the problem in NYC but rather the illegal handguns in the position of criminals. I’m sure he will get a call from the WH as will the sheriff in Wisconsin for not going with the program.
Report this comment
katzkiner
Jan. 28, 2013 at 12:29amIt is called a SlIde Fire. You can do the same thing with a shoe lace. The ATF arrested a man for the boot lace trick in the 90′s but the judge threw the case out. A foam coat and loose cheek weld will cause the same effect but it is not a controlable rate of fire. Full auto is not a good plan, you end up with an empty gun and enemies still standing. “Shall Not Be Infringed”
Report this comment
Whatmeworry-never
Jan. 27, 2013 at 10:52amJust another case of I’m with the Regime and can do anything but “We the people” are stupid sheep who can barely even go Bahh bahh. To the Regime —pffttt, you will be ignored and all your looney laws. I’m free and will stay that way.
Report this comment
rl
Jan. 27, 2013 at 10:27amShe’s a lib dem…. she can do whatever she wants….
Report this comment
napoleon_solo
Jan. 27, 2013 at 10:03amWhy, she merely asked don’t you know? And of course, some petty bureaucrat said, “Why sure Feinstein baby, I will set aside the law just for you.”
Report this comment
oldincarolina
Jan. 27, 2013 at 8:59amIt seems as though the Dems don’t pay any attention to our Constitution. Or, is it that none of them have read it , like most of the bills they pass.
Report this comment
love the kids
Jan. 27, 2013 at 8:42amD.C. police investigated Gregory after he held up what he said was a high-capacity ammunition magazine on live TV during “Meet the Press.” It’s a violation of District law to possess a magazine capable of holding 10 or more rounds of ammunition, but the D.C. attorney general ultimately decided not to prosecute.
Would you please post a list of other laws that you won’t go after people for? I’d really like to know what I can do.
.
Report this comment
M24
Jan. 27, 2013 at 7:27amFeinstein You Can Just Kiss My Asz What Ever You Try To Do Is Going To fail Your A Failure ,Your State Is A Failure ,And Your Office Is A failure. And As A Human Being It Looks Like Failure Is There To. So Why Don’t You Go back To Your Communist State And Crawl Back Under Your Rock And Leave Important Issues To The Adults. Malon Labe
Report this comment
PoliticalSmackdown {Subscribe & Friend me on YouTube}
Jan. 27, 2013 at 6:54amDianne Feinstein is an anti American Whore. she could use a nice dose of lead in her diet.
Report this comment
Robert Hawk
Jan. 27, 2013 at 6:26amMrs Feinstein, has the right to speak her opinion concerning the manufacturing of weapons. However she is walking a fine line between her sworn duty to uphold and defend the constitution and failure of that oath of office. As a root cause analyst, its extremely simple for me to observe that weapons or their availability to them, are not the cause of any crime. Weapons of any and all types are simply inanimate objects, therefore they are classified in root cause analysis as symptoms and not causation. Therefore Ms Feinstein’s argument is both unconstitutional and incorrect as she is only focusing on a symptom and not the actual cause.
The remainder of us with an ounce of common sense can understand this simple premise, so why not Ms Feinstein? The only explanation which makes sense in this case is not related to root cause, its related to her failed understanding of the welfare clause and its original interpretation which is locked into the federalist papers. Ms Feinstein is either a hard line Marxist-Leninist with a cause or a Useful Idiot who is being used by the Marxist-Leninist’s to remove arms from the American public. The stumbling blocks to achieving Marxist-Leninist control (totalitarian state) in the United States has always been bound up in two activities, one is government power over all things and the other is citizen access to weapons of defense, in order to stand against the government acquiring that level of control.
Report this comment
PAUL GULLO
Jan. 27, 2013 at 5:58amThe easiest way to keep yourself safe in nonviolent situations of perceived coersion is to listen to your fear, remove yourself from the situation, and expose the truth of the situation as best you know it to be true to all that will listen.
Do you think that Feinstein has put us in a nonviolent situation of coersion ?
We should not remove ourselves from the situation though. We should engage on all fronts!
Don’t be afraid to talk about town ,city, state and federal law anywhere anytime. I have heard my whole life not to talk about religion and politics in certain places. Well, if not now when . To not speak about things is taking a side. The wrong side , the side of tyranny.
Report this comment
1FreeVoice
Jan. 27, 2013 at 5:27amIf there is a “civil war” what makes you think the good guys would win?
1. Civil violence would make public support evaporate pretty quickly. Show angry guys with guns shooting at legally constituted authority ( police) and watch how fast ordinary people will back away.
2. The government has you MASSIVELY outgunned.
3. Their people are better trained, etc.
4. Their people would certainly refuse to fire on unarmed protesters, but in a “civil war” you have taken up arms against the government, and the military will respond in kind.
5. Do you think our external enemies would sit this one out, or stir up as much trouble as possible?
6. The media is already eager to portray supporters of the 2nd amendment as radical fringe, potentially violent, NUTS. Are you eager to give them more ammunition to prove to the rest of the public that they are right?
7. Think about what the government would have to do to put down the rebellion: emergency powers, suspension of civil liberties, etc. We would be left with a constitution that exists only on paper, and can be disregarded by the government when necessary ( or convenient ). It would set terrible precedents.
Look for strategies and tactics that will allow us to win instead of giving them more power.
MLK won, didn’t he?
Report this comment
Robert Hawk
Jan. 27, 2013 at 6:38amThat answer is simple
1) The numbers, 50-60 million vs less than 3 million (all government forces)
2) Many in the military stand hard against the Marxist-Leninists currently in office and their efforts toward totalitarian government
3) If the American people use the same tactics against a Marxist-Leninist government as the defenders of Ireland did for nearly two decades, the government will always loose.
Those are controls of men which will work but which will cost several lives. We do have another power over which the government has no control, a power which is written into our original law, the declaration of independence. That power can and has always assisted his children in their defense against tyranny. Americans must remember that Marxism-Leninism is little more than a theocracy, for its based completely upon doctrine. The apostle Paul attested to this fact in both Acts 17 and Colossians chapter 2. Wise men such as Mr Levin if backed by the several states, could bring this point and all the weight of the second amendment against the Marxist-Leninists, who would crumble under the weight of the constitution. Americans need to rally behind that level of opposition first, however they should train as private militia now, if the need should arise to turn to military action against a tyrannical government.
Report this comment
katzkiner
Jan. 28, 2013 at 12:36amGoogle, Worlds Largest Army And they already ignore the Constitution or we would not be having this discussion.
Report this comment
oldsoldier10
Jan. 27, 2013 at 12:53amdumb@ss feinstien in 1995 said she was worried and had a concealed carry permit because she did nt feel safe and posed with an AK, now the old p0s hypocrite feels more secure in her dementia and never needs an escort or armed protection when she goes out in public to demoralize her subjects.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/25/Feinstein-1995-I-Understand-The-Urge-To-Arm-Yourself-Because-That-s-What-I-Did
Report this comment
Robert Hawk
Jan. 27, 2013 at 6:45amMs. Feistein is a womanm the Marxist-Leninist’s chose her because of her sex. Its her point to turn the women of the United States against the men in a dialectical struggle over the possession of firearms. This is her one an only purpose. The Marxists-Leninist’s consider her a useful idiot and provide her the means necessary to take her case on national TV to all women in the United States. The method is known as conquer within.
Those for our constitutional rights need to return multiple opinions against Ms Feinstein in order to throw out her use of applied dialectics (the common tactic of Marxism-Leninism) as the means for achieving the disarming of US citizens. Marxist-Leninist’s will continue to assure that these acts of violence continue until the US public becomes weary of them. This must therefore be nipped in the bud, immediately.
Report this comment
Schofield_steve
Jan. 27, 2013 at 12:06amAgain Sen. Dianne Feinstein proving she has no clue what she is talking about, showing that this is about controlling people, not guns.
Search “Hi-Point 995″ and see if you can find the matching rifle on the board.
You’ll also discover that this 9mm (available in .40 S&W and .45 ACP) carbine is in fact fed by a SINGLE stack magazine… now why is this important? The only available factory magazines for this carbine are 8 and 10 rounds. In fact the only readily available aftermarket magazine for this carbine is of 15 rounds capacity, a far cry from the so called “high capacity” 30-100 round magazines of the assault rifles Dianne and her ilk are attacking. Its ten rounds, its one of the “good” guns, right?
Why would she be going after this weak (comparably) little carbine?
There are potentially two main reasons when you boil it down, “it looks scary” and the 995 carbine spit in Feinstein’s eye back in 94′.
First it looks scary this has been brought up time and time again and if you look into their legislation, it is proven true. They don’t give a crap about protecting your hunting rifle. If I slap a black synthetic thumbhole stock on my “lib. approved” Browning BAR in 30-06, then proceed to mount a rail to the forearm, have I in some way made a new “bad guy” gun?
Report this comment
Schofield_steve
Jan. 27, 2013 at 12:09am“No”, is the answer to anyone with a brain, but wait my Browning is equipped with a BOSS muzzle break. Thats a threaded barrel w/ a muzzle device, uh-oh, that means its a semi-auto w/ a military feature, so thats a “yes” to people like Feinstein even though it only has a 4 round capacity…
Secondly, this rifle filled a gap generated by the 94 AWB, intentionally or not, by making a compact, light weight, and cheap pistol caliber rifle, that is suited to self defence, readily and legally available to everyone after most of the more common choices were banned. Its cheap in price so that means along with being readily available, it’s readily available to Feinstein’s urban, young, male and poorer constituents legally AND it’s black so that’s a “No-no”. Only the wealthy and influential have a right to self defense to progressive’s like Feinstein, you’re just a criminal in the making if not counted amongst the elites and choose to arm yourself. It was clear example of what an absolute failure Dianne’s flag ship piece of legislation actually was… So with it being on the board with the other scary rifles behind her does anyone else get the feeling that this time “it’s personal” and not because of it “legally” defined features?
Report this comment
Schofield_steve
Jan. 27, 2013 at 12:13amAlmost like Feinstein cares less about safety of the little children and more about power and legacy… Why else would you push a nearly identical bill, with the exception of being larger and lacking a sunset, that has proven itself to be a failure? Unless that bill is directly related to your legacy and is a stepping stone for plans of even more disarmament that you can take credit for.
Maybe Feinstein took the sun setting of the original ban a little more personally then people think. Haha
Report this comment
vrooomvrooom
Jan. 26, 2013 at 11:34pmI have never heard a valid argument for any Democrat ideology. They always use a series of fallacies to try to make their case while dismissing facts and reason.
There is no difference between the needs of an individual in the military and the needs of an individual civilian when it comes to arms. They both need the weapon of their choice for the same reasons. Therefore military personnel and civilians should have access to the same individual arms. You wouldn’t tell someone serving in the military that they don’t need a full auto or mag that holds more than 10 rounds. If there ever were a valid reason to restrict civilians access to arms, then the same reason would apply to the military, government, and police.
Report this comment
MCLOVINIT
Jan. 26, 2013 at 11:32pmFeinstein’s grandstanding is pathetic, even for a lib.
Report this comment
GuruMeditation
Jan. 26, 2013 at 9:13pmHer actions and her proposed bills are DISCRIMINATORY!
Report this comment