Mercury One charity hits the $1m-raised mark for Oklahoma Tornado relief

Watch Live: Second House Hearing on IRS Scandal

Politics

Dem Senator: ‘Ted Cruz Is Not Going to Beat Dianne Feinstein on a Question of Constitutionality’

Mar. 14, 2013 4:33pm Jason Howerton

(MSNBC)

MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell and Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday took turns slamming Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) for lecturing Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) on the constitutionality of gun control legislation, specifically a ban on so-called “assault weapons.”

After playing a clip of the heated exchange on the Senate floor this morning, Mitchell produced a copy of the Constitution and argued Cruz was out of line to question Feinstein’s understanding of the document. She also said she had done her research, but didn’t elaborate.

“This was not a fair fight,” Mitchell said, insinuating that Cruz was out of his league. “Ted Cruz somehow thought he was going to take on Dianne Feinstein, who began her career in politics facing the bloodshed in San Francisco when she was elevated to become the mayor after the assassinations there? The personal experience of Dianne Feinstein informs this, and the personal experience of being a senator from Connecticut and representing the Newtown area as a congressman certainly informs you on this issue.”

Sen. Murphy agreed with Mitchell, saying it was not a fair fight because “Ted Cruz is not going to beat Dianne Feinstein on a question of constitutionality.”

“There is just no question about whether or not the assault weapons ban is constitutional. Why do we know that? Because we had it in place for 10 years in this country and it was never declared unconstitutional,” he added.

Watch the segment via MSNBC/Mediaite below:

(H/T: Noah Rothman, Mediaite)

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (139)

truthnstuff
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:07pm
Unbelievable. Andrea Mitchell and Sen. Chris Murphy trying to outdo FrankenFeinstein in the arena of stupidity. These cretins are shameless.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- michaelmoron
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:20pm
  This is what you must know:
  
  Andrea Mitchell was married to a FEDERAL RESERVE PRIVATE BANK executive.
  
  As far as this Ignorant politician goes, he is definately not one of the 75% of Politicians that are lawyers.
  
  Any lawyer knows the difference between ‘MAY’ and ‘SHALL’.
  
  They know that it did not say ‘MAY not be infringed’.
  
  ‘MAY’ would give them the ambiguity to achieve this act of regulation, because ‘MAY’ allows for OPTIONS.
  
  ‘SHALL’ means that there are NO OPTIONS !!!!
  
  This guy is an IDIOT !!!!
  
  Don’t forget that NBC is nothing more than GE TV.
  
  It is so.
  
  Report this comment
- 1TrueOne55
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:28pm
  And you can say the same for the NFA of 1934. It was “Deemed” Constitutional because the plaintiff died and his lawyer supposedly had other clients to “Deal” with, so when the Supreme Court sent the decision back to the lower court to be decided gun owners lost because there was no other plaintiff in the case to take it forward. So by default the Act was upheld, but there is archival evidence that it is unconstitutional and if some strong minded individual could get it pushed back in front of the Supreme Court.
  
  Report this comment
- AMERICA4EVER
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:41pm
  She said she had been on that committee for 20 years, that should tell one everything on what’s wrong with the country.
  
  Report this comment
- Bluebonnet
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 6:06pm
  AND, I put that Andrea Mitchell in the same catagory of Feinstein & Leahy. Too old to have an opinion that makes a difference…….all they know is how to criticize and cut down the others who are smarter, more intelligent, armed with facts and these old has-beens can’t take it, they use SMEAR tactics.
  
  You old timers living “the life,” doing more harm than good, stop making fools of yourselves.
  
  Report this comment
- brother_ed
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 6:27pm
  Once again, a response based on emotional events instead of truth and reason.
  
  That is why the Left wins, they appeal to emotions.
  
  Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, and big minds talk about ideas.
  
  There is no bigger idea than America and the freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights.
  
  The left concentrates on small and average minds.
  
  Report this comment
- The_Jerk
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 7:34pm
  Andrea Mitchell and Feinstein are both cultural changing, tradition destroying, I want to rule your life, Jewish progressives. Jews are 1.3% of the population. What are the odds?
  
  Report this comment
- The_Jerk
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 7:37pm
  Michaelmoron: “Andrea Mitchell was married to a FEDERAL RESERVE PRIVATE BANK executive.”
  
  And, anyone surprised to learn that he, too, is a cultural changing, tradition destroying, I want to rule your life, Jewish progressive. Defies both probability and commonsense.
  
  Report this comment
- Grey Eagle
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 9:43pm
  You got that right.
  
  Report this comment
- marssnw
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 12:33am
  She’s holding the book, so maybe she should try and read it. Maybe she should quote something from it that says Feinstein’s retarded thought process is correct. Oh thats right, she can’t!!! There is nothing in the Constitution to back her stupid claims. Just her lies and the propaganda that they spew 24/7 on PMSNBC
  
  Report this comment
- desertspeaks
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 5:16am
  frankenfeinstein is a life long politician and has grown contemptuous of the constitution and it’s imposed limitations.
  TERM LIMITS NOW! background checks NOW, drug testing NOW! lie detector tests NOW!
  Enforce their oaths of office, if ANY government EMPLOYEE “senator/congressman/potus/scotus/etc” breach their oaths of office, ARREST THEM for PERJURY!
  18 U.S.C. 1621
  18 U.S.C. 1001
  26 USC 1746
  18 USC Sec. 241 CONSPIRACY AGAINST RIGHTS
  42 USC Sec. 1985 CONSPIRACY TO INTERFERE WITH CIVIL RIGHTS
  MISPRISION
  
  Report this comment
- FrankieBaby
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 8:31am
  Andrea Mitchell reminds of a child trapped in an adult body. As naive as a 5 year old child. Notice they go right for the heartstrings of the “CHILDREN” yet again.
  
  Makes no difference who the the victims were. The crime was committed by a “Mentally Defective” lunatic as were ALL of the mass shooting in this nation. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM going all the way back to the University of Texas shooter. Go after them. YOUR NOT GETTING MY GUNS. You can hang that up.
  
  Report this comment
- JonSigMan
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 9:47am
  It’s like they’re in a contest for who can be the absolute most ignorant person on TV.
  
  Report this comment
- The_Cabrito_Goat
  Posted on March 15, 2013 at 11:05am
  It would boil my blood to have an MSNBC talking head wave the constitution in front of me like I haven’t read it before.
  
  Report this comment
I_AM_HARRISON_BERGERON
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:05pm
“Ted Cruz is not going to beat Dianne Feinstein on a question of constitutionality.”
“There is just no question about whether or not the assault weapons ban is constitutional. Why do we know that? Because we had it in place for 10 years in this country and it was never declared unconstitutional,

Whaaaaat ???? Okay Crazy Uncle Joe, it’s time to set the bar higher on the old Gaffemeter. Which, by the way is starting to smoke.

By the way Government… If you have to manipulate the wording or intent of a bill in order to declare that it is constitutional then you are clearly reaching for a way to violate the intent of the Constitution that was put in place to protect the people from just such activity. We are not a Democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic, bought and paid for by men far greater than you. That Constitution guarantees my liberty that I am as prepared to fight for as my forefathers! Look around at the rest of the world, democracy only guarantees an eventual civil war when the the people do nothing but vote against each other for personal gain at anothers expense.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The-Monk
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:15pm
  Hi I_AM_HARRISON_BERGERON,
  
  I noticed an account the other day called “HARRISON_BERGERON”.
  
  Is that you also? TIA
  
  Report this comment
- I_AM_HARRISON_BERGERON
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:24pm
  @ The-Monk,
  No, this is the only place that I have ever used that name. Interesting though.
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:26pm
  I tracked it down. Here it is.
  
  http://www.theblaze.com/users/harrison_bergeron/
  
  Report this comment
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:51pm
  Hi MONK, looks like more than a couple of fans of Kurt Vonnegut.
  
  Report this comment
- spirited
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 6:02pm
  Hello MONK
  
  ;^> you bad!
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 6:19pm
  Hi Spirited,
  
  Just observant. I asked Soybom315 the same question when he added “ii” to his name.
  
  You know how nasty those trolls can be. Wango has ready tried to duplicate my CAEROGAP theme with a new account but had to spell it wrong. He ended up with COEROGAP.
  
  When you see that one post it’s not me it’s Wango. LOL
  
  Report this comment
- I_AM_HARRISON_BERGERON
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 8:43pm
  Monk, That was in fact me. When I tried to set up the username the system messed up on the confirmation and would not let me in. I couldn’t reuse the username so I altered it a bit.
  Very observant, btw.
  
  Report this comment
- 187rakkisan
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 9:38pm
  @ monk
  I have to first appologize that I’m not here enough to know, but ya got my interests peaked. what is caerogap?? Or are you posting that later?
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 10:03pm
  Hi 187rakkisan,
  
  Yes I will. Still trying to figure out the best way to do it.
  
  It’s so simple it’s complicated. Too many different ways to post it.
  
  Just keep an eye out for it.
  
  Report this comment
Just_Us2
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:05pm
Dems are constantly on the wrong side of history…let alone the constitution. If Dems had their way, we would all be speaking German and hunting Joooooooos.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- shoulda coulda woulda
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:18pm
  Lets go back shall we
  1860 Democratic Party Defends Slavery
  1860 -1970 The Solid South (Democrats who were against civil rights legistation)
  1968 LBJ coerce former Democrat Senatorial peers to vote for Civil Rights
  Senator Byrd (Democratic Senator Patron Saint) against civil rights
  The Great Society (from LBJ) designed the new American Plantation
  Democrats against establishment of Isreal
  etc, etc…….
  
  Report this comment
- Mil-Dot
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:38pm
  All progs and their sympathizers, supporters,operatives, and protectors must be hunted down and driven from our land. They must pay a huge price for their communist leanings. So much of a price that it will remembered for generations to come as what and who not to F ‘k with. You don’t mess with American patriots and vets, and you don’t screw with our Constitution or you will pay big time. They must be taught a lesson they will never forget. A brutal lesson.
  
  Report this comment
- 4XGrace
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:38pm
  When ever a person in a senior or visible position is in the wrong and cannot honestly answer the question put to them, they will list their impressive and irrelevant credentials in the hopes that by the time they run out of verbal diarrhea they hope that for one of the following: the question is completely forgotten; the upstart has been sufficiently embarrassed and cowed into submission; and/or whatever the answer they have to give afterwards is drowned out by all the crap of the preamble.
  
  Wake up people! Fienstien just dissed you all and showed how much she despises the constitution and the American people.
  
  Report this comment
- Wolf
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 7:14pm
  Not to mention, always on the opposite side of Truth.
  
  Report this comment
65Mustang
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:04pm
The only thing Diana Feinstein knows is how to continue her raid (payroll checks and benefits) on the taxpaying citizens and screwing us over. She knows nothing about the Constitution or anything the Founding Fathers did to prevent a dictator to highjack this country.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- pragmaticpatriot
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:18pm
  yet the Socialist State of Kalifornia keeps electing her, or they dont object to election fraud
  
  Report this comment
UNALIEN
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:03pm
liberals,,, make stuff up

“if a court can prove that you incite imminent lawlessness by falsely shouting “fire” in a crowded theater, it can convict you. If you incite an unlawful riot, your speech is “brigaded” with illegal action, and you will have broken the law. But merely falsely shouting “fire” does not break the law, even if it risks others’ safety.”

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
RJJinGadsden
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:00pm
Hmmmm, I find Frankenstein’s declarations to be a bit dubious. I do seem to recall that Dan White shot Harvey Milk with a revolver and likely it was a .38, but not certain of that. Not really the assault weapons they claim today. The weapon contained six shots of which White fired five rounds at close range striking Milk, with the final two shots against his skull. She has her incremental plans at disarming America in her perception. This included the Brady Bills I and II that sunsetted under GW Bush. That was based on the shooting of President Reagan and Brady with a .22 cal revolver. Her bills then attacked those black assault weapons too. It really is easy to see how her mind works. Take away those long guns first, then go after the weapons that really are being used to kill more in this country. Funny how the criminals will continue to keep theirs while acquiring more. Only the honest law abiding Americans will be disarmed.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:11pm
  BTW, I do blame all of this gun grabbing of the last couple of decades on Nixon. He was the one who tried to ban and collect what he deemed the Saturday Night Special. Trouble was that it included the revolvers that almost all of the nation’s detectives, FBI agents, and even many of the Secret Service carried. Not exactly a smart move, and that action has only spawned more of today’s lunacy.
  
  Report this comment
- Rayblue
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 6:00pm
  Blame Nixon ?
  A blame Bush moment like the preceding stands alone in its unadulterated non-value. Except for the freedom purging cesspool queues whose pocket you’ve played yourself into.
  
  Report this comment
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 6:46pm
  RAYBLUE, What? As for my blaming Nixon for starting a gun grab, I voted for the man, and became aware of what he was trying to do. Sounded like good intentions, but that didn’t work even with a stacked Dem Congress. You can blame Bush all you want, and I never did care for him. He was only a better choice over Gore, then Lurch. At least he refused to sign either Brady Bill back into activity after each sunsetted.
  
  Report this comment
- Chuck Stein
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 7:19pm
  @ Rayblue
  Nixon was a progressive. An anti-communist, but a progressive. Remember/study “wage and price controls.” ? How about EPA and EEOC — both Nixonian entities.
  
  Report this comment
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 9:00pm
  CHUCK STEIN, Oh yeah, I remember the wage and price controls all too well. Our wages were frozen, but anybody that wanted to raise a price simple made a name change on the label and voila a new product. Or, would change the portion slightly also allowing them to raise the prices. Regardless, I could not get a raise while prices did continue to rise.
  
  Report this comment
rochrealtor
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:58pm
Which program did this progressive watch…Mr. Cruz already did!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
NHwinter
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:55pm
I’m so tired of the arrogrance of the Dems. As if they can’t be questioned about anything they think or try to enact. Thank you Ted Cruz for calling into question the Constitutionality of her bill. She is an oldy that needs to go, just like John McCain and Lindsey Graham. Time to clean house with new people who believe in our country and the Constitution as it is written.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Mil-Dot
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:45pm
  Notice how it is always the “Jews” in the media, Mitchell and her ilk, that are on the side of the commies. I do not purport to understand the history of it but there is a link somewhere, somehow. I don’t really consider them REAL Jews. They are something else. They are more like atheists. Those that don’t believe in a higher entity. They are almost sub-human in their interpretation of life and freedom. It is really quite incredible. They are the definition of cretinism. It is as though “anything for a buck and control” is really how they think. Nothing is forbidden. No sin not an option. Someone please enlighten us all as to where this mentality comes from. It is borderline evil. What is most disconcerting is that the good Jews get lumped in with these devils and suffer inappropriate retribution for their actions. Hitler did the same thing, assuming they were homogenous in thought.
  
  Report this comment
republic2011
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:53pm
Dems doing damage control.. Not used to anyone standing up to them. Republican establishment included. Just like the damage control McLame and Lindsay did after Rand Paul showed them up.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
seeds12
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:53pm
The head line is really funny. Seems like he did already.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
LibertyKnight
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:53pm
United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)
The U.S Government appealed the decision and on March 30, 1939, the U.S. Supreme Court heard the case. Attorneys for the United States argued four points:
1.The NFA is intended as a revenue-collecting measure and therefore within the authority of the Department of the Treasury.
2.The defendants transported the shotgun from Oklahoma to Arkansas, and therefore used it in interstate commerce.
3.The Second Amendment protects only the ownership of MILITARY-TYPE weapons appropriate for use in an organized militia.
4.The “double barrel 12-gauge Stevens shotgun having a barrel less than 18 inches in length, bearing identification number 76230″ was never used in any militia organization.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- LibertyKnight
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:58pm
  On May 15, 1939 the Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion by Justice McReynolds, reversed and remanded the District Court decision. The Supreme Court declared no conflict between the NFA and the Second Amendment had been established, writing:
  “In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a ‘shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length’ at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.”
  
  Report this comment
The-Monk
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:52pm
“There are plenty of weapons out there,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said…”

Lets use that same logic on one of the progressives favorite topics…. gay marriage.

There’s plenty of woman out there, you don’t need to have such a wide variety of sexes to marry. We just want to limit it to something more reasonable. You can still get married just not to who you want to. You don’t need such a large amount of choices.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:02pm
  Hi MONK, you are going to send WANGO, and ENCINOM into quite the tizzy!
  This you must know.
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 5:31pm
  Hi RJJ,
  
  After you get done with that reading check out this story and the verses in it.
  
  MSNBC’s Chris Matthews Claims Jesus Didn’t Preach ‘Fire and Brimstone’ — But Is This True?
  
  Report this comment
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 6:00pm
  Hi MONK, I did read that earlier, just don’t recall if I made a comment though. LOL, speaking of that, I haven’t seen FIREANDBRIMSTONE here today, and BALDY hasn’t said anything since the 12th. BRIMSTONE is just probably out of school on Spring Break, but I’m really surprised that BALDY has not resurrected himself again yet, I’m almost positive that there is a paycheck being held up until he does.
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 6:22pm
  Hi RJJ,
  
  Actually it’s better if you read that first then come back to it for a re-read after you read mine.
  
  Report this comment
- brother_ed
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 6:34pm
  @RJJ
  
  His paycheck is probably held up due to the sequester…O said alot of government employees would have to be furloughed ;)
  
  Of course, he (Obama) did treat me like a 6th grader when he explained what ‘furlough’ meant.
  
  Report this comment
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 8:56pm
  BROTHER_ED, LOL, that has to explain it. Normally when he gets kicked off, he is right back with a new name. Much like WANGO.
  
  Report this comment
kitcarker
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:50pm
Queen Diane she is a character is she not she thinks she is the smartest person in the rain she does not know diddly about the Constitution of the United States the exact 1 that she swore to protect into about that either she is a crook or she is stupid

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
ALL4FREEDOM
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:49pm
It was never declared unconstitutional because it was never properly challenged. This proposal is, on it’s face, unconstitutional, and Ted Cruz knows it. Also, he knows the Constitution better than she does.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
kitcarker
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:49pm
well if she was so smart in respect to the Constitution she wouldn’t be shoveling the junk that she is.she is sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States and by not doing so shows she is either crooked or stupid

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
txannie
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:48pm
The funny part is that Ted Cruz has already won and the dems are too stupid to realize it.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
TH30PH1LUS
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:47pm
Chris Murphy,

So, by your logic, NOTHING is unconstitutional so long as it is not “declared” to be so?

The Democrat Party vitriol against the Bill of Rights is escalating. It’s like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Cavallo
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:46pm
The Dems simply aren’t going to hide it anymore. I don’t know why they just don’t slap on Bobo arm bands with that PepsiCo symbol he has. They’re fascists. I’m going to laugh when this bill is crushed in the House. Sorry, you aint getting spit, and even if you did, I’d still be able to get an AR-15 and any of the other assorted firearms. In fact I ALWAYS had them. Prove I didn’t. If you want to come confiscate them, make sure your will is up to date and your premiums are paid up.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
hypnos
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:45pm
So she’s good at being a politician certainly doesn’t mean she understands the constitution.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
KILLACOMMIE4MOMMY
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:45pm
You cant beat Liberals becasue they tend to make up what they want to believe. So using Facts and Logic slide right off of them.
They interpet things how THEY see them and when confronted with facts they ramble on and change to topic using emotion.
Slimy Liberals, they make me sick.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
STREBOR
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:44pm
Progressive “news” shows……..mutual admiration society. Cruz vs. Swinestein senate death match.
Pay Per View tonight………..beeeeee therrrrrrrre! Go Ted!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
RabbiDRJerkins
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:42pm
Shalom,
I agree with Mr. Murphy on one point: there is no question about the Constitutionality of the assault weapons ban; it is clearly and demonstrably unconstitutional.
When is a “conservative” senator going to have the integrity and chutzpah to suggest a repeal of all the unconstitutional gun laws that are currently on the books?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Gonzo
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:51pm
  The_Jerk, see?
  
  Report this comment
TotallyNotATroll
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:42pm
I watched the exchange between the two senators, I must have missed the contest or attempt to beat anyone or do liberal tv hosts just make up drama like reality tv does? nevermind, rhetorical question

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:41pm
So the Democrats state that the gun-control and gun-seizure bill is Constitutional?

That is a pile of bovine byproduct if I have ever seen and smelled any .

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:40pm
No question on its constitutionality?

We are guaranteed the right to bear arms and this bill is one more move to seize and outlaw all firearms across the board.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Ben__Franklin
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 4:46pm
  “There is just no question about whether or not the assault weapons ban is constitutional. Why do we know that? Because we had it in place for 10 years in this country and it was never declared unconstitutional,” he added.
  
  and there you have it. That is why you never give Congress and inch. Liberal thought 101 ~ because it was unconstitutional in the past but no one called them on it – it is Constitutional now.
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.