Guns

Savor the Richly Deserved Defeat of Feinstein's 'Assault Weapon' Ban

|

Senate Judiciary Committee

Yesterday Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) revealed that her "assault weapon" ban will not be part of the gun control bill that Senate Democrats plan to offer next month. Although her bill still can be offered as an amendment, Politico reports, "its exclusion from the package makes what was already an uphill battle an almost certain defeat." At the risk of reading too much into this delightful development, I count it as a victory not just for the Second Amendment but for rationality in lawmaking.

As a comparison of the testimony pro and con readily reveals, supporters of Feinstein's bill never offered a plausible, let alone persuasive, explanation for the distinction she drew between the guns she deemed "legitimate" and the dreaded "assault weapons" she sought to ban. The closer you looked at the bill, the less sense it made, a fact that Feinstein tried to paper over by encouraging people to conflate semi-automatic, military-style rifles with the machine guns carried by soldiers. That flagrant fraud sufficed to win passage of the federal "assault weapon" ban that expired in 2004 (which was also sponsored by Feinstein), and it continues to influence public opinion. But this time around it was not enough to obscure the absurdity of Feinsten's attempt to distinguish between good and evil guns by reference to irrelevant features such as barrel shrouds and adjustable stocks. With no evidence or arguments to offer, Feinstein despicably invoked dead, "dismembered" children in a transparent bid to short-circuit logical thought. Her appeal to blind fear was familiar to anyone who has watched this authoritarian centrist rail against mythical drugs or kowtow to the national security state. I savor her richly deserved defeat.

Advertisement

NEXT: Rand Paul's Signaling Exercise on Immigration

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. While I savor her defeat, I’m still saddened that she remains in office. Can anybody out Cali way fix that for us?

    1. Eliminationist rhetoric!

      1. Just the dead hooker we plant as evidence in her bed. And we likely will only have to borrow one from Vitter’s or Menendez’ stock of dead hookers.

    2. And replace her with whom? She may be the ugliest snake head of the California Hydra but you’ll never get anywhere loping it off.

      1. Compared to the other head of that snake, DiFi is a paragon of wisdom and beauty. Living proof that every Dumb needs a Dumberer to be compared to.

        1. Calvin Coolidge| 3.19.13 @ 3:34PM |#
          “Compared to the other head of that snake, DiFi is a paragon of wisdom and beauty.”

          Herein lies the problem: She’s the *best* of the lot!

          1. Gavin Newsome is actually considered a right wing reactionary in his home town of San Francisco. That’s how bad it is here.

    3. Democratic senators will be the rule for California for several more decades at least. It’s the urban/rural demographics. The majority of voters in this state are urban, and urban means Democrat no matter what state you live in.

      1. Bullshit.

        It’s pure demographics.

        Latinos hate republicans for being the ‘white’ party just like drunk micks in MA hated republicans for being the ‘English’ party 80 years ago. And their great grandkids have carried that hatred while forgetting the ‘English’ reason for it.

        1. QFT. Too funny.

      2. The Republicans just need to come up with someone who won’t make anti-choice statements and isn’t stupid wealthy, preferably someone with an interesting heritage. What happens is that California Republicans invariably nominate someone terrible, and all Boxer or Feinstein have to do is remind women voters that they’re for “choice.” These women are not “liberal” in the true sense of the word, by any means.

  2. This doesn’t really seem like a positive development. Was not DiFi’s ban excised to make passage of the other gun-control measures more palatable to the other Congresscritters? They are still going after non-FFL mediated transfers and pushing ‘universal’ background checks, no?

    1. I thought universal background checks were out

    2. Yes, but these are “reasonable” “common sense” restrictions.

    3. They are still going after non-FFL mediated transfers and pushing ‘universal’ background checks, no?

      And that, of course, is the whole ball-game….

  3. Or they gave up on it to bolster support for the far more destructive background checks law. See, they are the reasonable ones, amenable to compromise.

    1. Luckily, that should be DOA as well. I hope.

      1. I think so too. As badly as the Republican leadership would love to sell out on it so that they can feel like they belong and are liked in Washington, Red state Dems in the Senate will kill it if nothing else.

        1. My sense is it passes with 51 votes in the Senate and dies in committee in the House. If Boehner was a really good Speaker, he would guarantee a floor vote (which would fail) the day after the Senate passed the House budget. But no, he’s of the Stupid Party.

          1. Remind me again which one that is? They’re interchangeable.

      2. I hope so, but it’s one of those things (like Obamacare) that seems reasonable and measured to the low-information voter. They have trouble understanding downstream effects.

        1. It is depressing. You have to operate in a political environment where the most important voters get their news from American Idol and reading US.

          1. Don’t forget the Daily Show.

          2. You forgot to mention public schools.

          3. Woe the demise of ‘solid’ news, like the National Inquirer.

        2. Reading Woken Furies in the other browser window. So far, I’m enjoying it more than the second which I found to be a little thin in its presentation of atmosphere and attitude (esp. compared to the first, which had attitude like a pig has bacon).

          1. It’s about time.

            1. Speaking of it’s about time, next up, Banks, The Algebraist. Purchased mobis of both at the same time.

      3. Luckily, that should be DOA as well. I hope.

        The problem is that “background checks” sounds reasonable to 80% of people, who only think about it for 10 seconds.

        And it gives dems a great talking point – “all we want to do is prevent convicted felons from getting guns and these nuts are opposed to that common sense.

  4. I hope the Senate Dems don’t play this up as them being compromising and bipartisan.

    “Hey, we dropped the crazy assault weapons ban stuff, so you guys should totally go along with the rest of our gun control bill. Meet us in the middle!”

    1. And I’ve been answered by the two people before me…

      The very idea of having to pay for a background check on my son before I give him a rifle is ludicrous.

      1. One of the few things I miss about Vermont is that my dad gave me several guns, where the entire process involved him picking out one he thought would be good for me, writing a guy a check, and then teaching me how to use it safely.

        1. I would brag about what pops left me, but I’m not sure if even fifty years after the incident it would not still warrant an investigation. I’ll give you a clue, the place he liberated it from is in the first sentence of this post.

          1. Your dad cut a gun out of Feinstein’s body? What was it even doing in their in the first place!

            1. I mean by ‘this’ post ‘my’ post.

              1. Hmm. It isn’t spelled correctly is it?

                1. That correct. Just a sound a like. Sorry for the delay. I had to meet up with some traffic.

            2. She was trying to hide it the last place they would ever look…. her ass. I commend Killaz’ father’s bravery.

      2. The very idea of having to pay for a background check on this person you believe to be your son…

        1. “Your” son!? What are you, some kind of kooky Ayn Rand follower? That “son” belongs to the state, regardless of their choice to let you raise him (within narrowly proscribed limits, of course).

  5. After all the “Obamacare is dead” stories and “Obamacare killed for good this time, used a double tap to its zombie head”, I am going to wait a bit longer before buying this.

    1. And who can forget, “TARP has been defeated for good, since the Republicans will face a revolt from fiscal cons if they vote for it”?

      1. They actually did face that revolt though…

        1. Yes, but that didn’t stop them from passing TARP. Likewise, anyone could see that passing Obamacare would be suicide for the Dems in 2010, but foresight is not these guys’ strong suit.

        2. Rep. Howard Coble, fucking traitor on the second vote.

    2. Remember how the Supreme Court was going to kill it? Yeah, those were great days, when we still had some hope.

      1. That one I actually believed. Who would have thought anyone would buy the “it’s a tax” argument?

        Have you gotten even older while I was gone?

        1. No, I looped. I’m now very young. Kind of like Star Child, but not in orbit.

          1. If you’re referencing the first version of that show, you’ve just proved how old you are.

            1. Comic books, whatever. I had to google it and got distracted by a phone call partway through.

            2. You mean the movie, 2001? Though, now that you mention it, they should make a series out of it.

              1. My God! Its full of stars!

                1. I get that all the time. That, and “I’m afraid I can’t do that, Dave.”

                  1. I need to befriend someone named David…

                    1. Absolutely. Not only can you 2001 him all day, you can also do the Cheech & Chong bit.

        2. It’s a tax even though Congress amended it to specifically declare it not to be a tax.

          1. I hereby declare the law invalid, by the powers I inherently retain as an American citizen.

            1. You retain nothing. Freedom only exists in the context of the State, who creates freedom by dispensing Indulgences, allowing the bearer to refrain from following the proscribed Laws.

              What is all this “state of nature” nonsense? We didn’t study that is public school! We learned about Roosevelt’s Four Freedoms, and that is good enough for us!

              We hold these truths to be self-evident, that Governments were instituted among men in order to create Freedoms, which exist only through their agency.

      2. Oh, and how the states were going to opt out?

      3. There is but one upshot of that. Watching the shock on the faces of middle class liberals as they see their health insurance premiums double is going to be priceless.

        1. I think it will take some time to register.

          I had a guy in January smugly explain to me how wonderful Obama’s resolution of the ‘fiscal cliff’ debate was (‘no raised taxes on the middle class’!!) I asked him to check his actual pay stubs between December and January. He then refused to admit that the reduction had anything to do with Obama. It was something to do with Corporations and their greedyness.

          1. My wife’s cousin is this huge liberal Obama voter. He works for the Air Force and is facing 22 days worth of furlough. the whining on Facebook has been epic and quite tasty.

            1. Ask for his tears in a bottle, dilute it with water and sell it to the commenters here.

              Put me down for a case.

              1. I’ll sign up for two. Extra bitter, please.

              2. Yes, put me down for a case as well, the tears of disillusioned liberals make almost as good of a monocle cleanser as that of homeless orphans.

        2. That’s just the corporations fault, and is only allowed because the reasonable Dems tried to compromise with the Rethuglicans who refused to compromise at all because they’re obstructionist.

        3. I’m sure there’s still a hoarding kulak or two around that they’ll be able to blame for it.

          1. With the sequester, they have mostly turned on Obama. He just didn’t act forcefully enough to stop the evil Republicans from doing all of this harm.

            1. Oh heads up; as a history reading guy, if you get a chance, I just finished this little gem, and it makes for some grim reading. But worth it, if only to bone up on facts to refute morons who credit communism with the recent rise of China.

              http://www.amazon.com/Hungry-G…..0805056688

              1. I remember reading reviews of that when it came out. I need to get out of my medieval English rut.

                1. I just read Foundation: The History of England from Its Earliest Beginnings to the Tudors. Not bad.

                  1. A Foundation prequel? Could I have my toenails pulled instead?

                    1. Different Foundation, with fewer spaceships.

                    2. LOL. Good one, RC.

                    3. Here you go RC. Pull away

                      http://www.goodreads.com/book/…..Foundation

                  2. Pro,

                    Read The Plantagenets buy Dan Jones. Came out in UK last year and is out this year in the US. It is very readable and highly interesting. Starts with the White Ship disaster and ends with the disaster that was Richard II.

                2. I glutted myself on the Hundred Years War and the Wars of the Roses a few years ago and haven’t muddled around in there again since. I imagine I’ll get back around to it, but I’m doing the grand tour of East Asia first (biographies of Ghengis Khan and Chin She Huang Di, history of the samurai, fall of the Ming Dynasty, etc.)

                  1. Gojira,

                    I have decided I am going to do for Edward III what Sharon K. Pennman did for Henry II. Edward III is the great national hero of England and no one writes much historical fiction about him.

                  2. “I’m doing the grand tour of East Asia first (biographies of Ghengis Khan and Chin She Huang Di, history of the samurai, fall of the Ming Dynasty, etc.)”

                    Recommended: “China, a History”
                    http://www.amazon.com/China-Hi…..y+of+china
                    (I’d have sworn this was posted earlier, but it looks like it turned into squirrel food)

                3. I would prefer he die from something hospital-related. Maybe his surgeon misses a contralateral cancer because his hospital is using obsolete imaging systems. Maybe there aren’t enough experienced radiologists on staff when he comes in from an emergency. The options are innumerable.

                  1. How did this end up here.

                    1. Squirrels!

            2. He just didn’t act forcefully enough to stop the evil Republicans from doing all of this harm.

              That’s what some people don’t seem to understand about Obama’s declining approval rations. Much of this disapproval is that he didn’t go far enough.

        4. John| 3.19.13 @ 3:15PM |#
          “There is but one upshot of that. Watching the shock on the faces of middle class liberals as they see their health insurance premiums double is going to be priceless.”

          Nothing of the sort. They simply blame it on the ‘profit-making’ medical care industry.
          There is no limit to the stupid distribution among lefties.

          1. My neighbor works for an medical insurer. She and a small army of others spend their entire day fixing paperwork glitches and making sure forms were filed in the proper places. All the profit the insurers should be making is instead going straight into compliance. This sort of hole filling counts as a job created for Obama.

            1. “This sort of hole filling counts as a job created for Obama.”
              Windows don’t fix themselves.

        5. If what’s happening in California is any guide, they’ll just blame it on the EBIL CORPURASHUNS.

      4. There are no words for what ought to happen to John Roberts.

        1. He will die rich and arrogant unable to understand why both sides hate his guts.

        2. Yes there are. He should be taxed within an inch of his life.

          1. How about beaten about the head an neck with a crowbar?

            We’ll say it’s a blood tax.

            Brilliant.

            1. He’ll just argue we can’t harm any of his flesh.

              1. It’s not harming. It’s taxing.

                1. They’ve established that they can get the blood, but they haven’t established they can get the flesh. Plus he’s a judge so he gets to do what he wants. I’d think being both a lawyer and a contemporary of William, you’d understand this.

                  1. They’ve established that they can get the blood, but they haven’t established they can get the flesh.

                    He can just declare that blood is flesh, and flesh is blood. Those are distinction a humble judge shouldn’t make.

                    1. Why would he be doing that himself?

              2. Look, in all his years of lawin’ he should know that the public’s need to satisfactorily turn his head into a turnip overrides any piddling concerns about his “flesh”.

                1. All you need is for congress to pass a law requiring that he become a human pi?ata. Judicial humility would require that he assist in whatever way he can.

    3. After all the “Obamacare is dead” stories and “Obamacare killed for good this time, used a double tap to its zombie head”, I am going to wait a bit longer before buying this.

      Which is a very wise play.

      I recall everyone dancing on Obamacare’s grave, and I warned (and warn here again), just because she’s lyin’ in bed next to you, naked, don’t mean you’re gonna get laid.

      She just might be a crazy teasing bitch.

  6. I’ll believe it when ammo becomes available again.

    1. I was finally able to buy .308 without a 2nd mortgage last week, so…

      1. Are you sure it wasn’t just spent shell casings packed with tin foil? Cause that’s pretty much all that’s available here.

        1. Well, I haven’t tried to shoot anybody with it (because assault weaponz derp), but it does have bullets in the casing.

  7. I count it as a victory not just for the Second Amendment but for rationality in lawmaking.

    It wasn’t rationality. Feinstein’s bill passed in the Judiciary committee 10-8, with all Ds in favor and all Rs opposed.

    It just didn’t have the necessary crossover Republican votes to avoid a filibuster of the sort that Rand Paul made clear could happen if necessary.

    1. The make-up of the Judiciary committee was interesting to me. The Dems are all Northeast / West Coast (and Minnesota), the Republicans are South or West.

      Seems like an easy vote for the Dems on it, but I can see why Reid didn’t want it in the main bill.

    2. Bring back ‘protefeed;’ everything he said was 6x as smart and gave me a huge erection. No homo.

      1. Homo erectus?

  8. OT (but making me angrier and angrier) – Pigs call for telcos to keep a log of all SMS traffic, just in case.

    FTA – The law enforcement proposal would require wireless providers to record and store customers’ SMS messages — a controversial idea akin to requiring them to surreptitiously record audio of their customers’ phone calls — in case police decide to obtain them at some point in the future. http://news.cnet.com/8301-1357…..-messages/

    “Billions of texts are sent every day, and some surely contain key evidence about criminal activity,” Richard Littlehale from the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation will tell Congress, according to a copy (PDF) of his prepared remarks. “In some cases, this means that critical evidence is lost. Text messaging often plays a big role in investigations related to domestic violence, stalking, menacing, drug trafficking, and weapons trafficking.”

    1. “Billions of texts are sent every day, and some surely contain key evidence about criminal activity,” Richard Littlehale from the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation will tell Congress, according to a copy (PDF) of his prepared remarks. “In some cases, this means that critical evidence is lost. Text messaging often plays a big role in investigations related to domestic violence, stalking, menacing, drug trafficking, and weapons trafficking.”

      Fine. If you think there is ongoing criminal activity, then identify the crime. Identify a suspect. Show there is reasonable suspicion that the suspect is committing the crime. Convince a judge with your findings. Then, get a fucking warrant. And collect your evidence.

      The old fashioned, moral, and Constitutional way.

      1. But that’s haaaard!

      2. Their issue isn’t with the procedure, it’s that oftentimes there’s no evidence to collect after the procedures are followed:

        An internal Justice Department document that the ACLU obtained through the Freedom of Information Act shows that, as of 2010, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint did not store the contents of text messages. Verizon did for up to five days, a change from its earlier no-logs-at-all position, and Virgin Mobile kept them for 90 days. The carriers generally kept metadata such as the phone numbers associated with the text for 90 days to 18 months; AT&T was an outlier, keeping it for as long as seven years.

        I support that position since it’s akin to wiretapping: the carriers shouldn’t have to record a conversation because there might be a crime involved. I’ve been on the cops’ side here before though; if Verizon kept records of text messages for more than a week it could have saved me a week’s worth of screaming when an error on Vz’s part caused our GC’s phone to send the same text to his secretary 30,000 time in a 24 hour period.

        1. an error on Vz’s part caused our GC’s phone to send the same text to his secretary 30,000 time in a 24 hour period.

          Oh, hell, I’ve done that (what GC hasn’t?), only it was on purpose.

          1. Heh. If he had an unlimited plan nobody would have ever noticed. But no, he needed that extra $10 a month in his budget for who knows what.

            It did cause the biggest tirade anyone in my office has ever heard, though. 60 people on our floor including all of our C-level execs either heard what I said while bitching out the billing supervisor or could hear that I was doing it.

        2. I guess my point was; just because the cops can’t get every shred of evidence they need to make a case against a criminal, doesn’t mean that they should collect “evidence” against every citizen indiscriminately. Old fashioned police work is still necessary. Otherwise, we should all just be monitored remotely at all hours in case we commit a crime? So it’s easier for the cops to get their evidence?

          1. Citizen, if you’re concerned about this it can only be because you have something to hide.

      3. Show “probable cause” to that warrant not “reasonable suspicion”. It’s bullshit anyway. The idea is that there are “detached and neutral” judges out there deciding whether there is probable cause. We all know they’re on the same team.

  9. “”…a victory not just for the Second Amendment but for rationality in lawmaking“”

    These words. I do not understand them.

    1. Yeah, easy there Sullum.

  10. http://espn.go.com/chicago/mlb…..life-field

    Interesting article on how the leeches in Wrigleyville totally rob the Cubs. And gee, what a surprise, the Cubs have an offer from a suburb who won’t rob them and let them run their business.

    http://www.fannation.com/truth…..emont-cubs

    1. Oh, man. If the Cubs could just win the WS (I can’t believe I’m typing this as an early-life Cardinals fan who adopted the Lastros after moving to Houston as a teen.) the first year the new park opened, it would be EPIC.

      1. I don’t pay much attention to the Cubs. But I had no idea the people in the area were such assholes. They build bleachers on their roofs and sell tickets to watch the game and then get the city to pass an ordinance to keep the Cubs from putting in advertising or a big HD screen because it would block their view. They make a fortune off the game crowd but then get the city to stop the Cubs from playing night games because it might interfere with their take. Only in Chicago.

      2. The Lastros will win a WS before the Cubs ever do.

        1. Mostly because of Wrigley. Not only does the local neighborhood make it impossible to compete, the park itself is horrible. Every other team in baseball has a park with consistent qualities that allow them to build a team to fit the park. Wrigley, because of the wind, is a hitters park one day and a pitchers the next. The Cubs effectively have no home field advantage.

          1. I have to object to this. I’m no fan of the Cubs, but Wrigley is a great park to watch a game in.

            I particularly enjoyed watching then-recently acquired Greg Maddux hurting the Cubs as a Braves pitcher. In the top ten dumbest moves by the Cubs.

            1. It is a great place to watch a game in. But it is a horrible place to play a game in because of the wind. The Cubs can’t build a pitching heavy team because when the wind blows out the place is a home run pad. But they can’t build a hitter heavy team because when the wind blows in, it is nearly impossible to hit a home run there.

              1. Yes, but I like nature interfering with sports. Even more so with football. I’d ban domes if I were god-king of the NFL.

                1. How do you feel about the NY Super Bowl? In favor of it even despite being from Florida?

                  1. I don’t care where they play, though I think some locations make more sense if you want fans to be happy. Probably warmer ones. However, I’d giggle with glee if they played the game in Green Bay. In February.

                    1. I just think that snow games are the best to watch, and that it’s unfair that some teams have the opportunity to have homefield advantage (e.g. Saints) but most don’t.

                    2. In the spirit of international harmony, I think they should play Super Bowls in really hot Southern Hemisphere locations, too.

                  2. I’m going to enjoy the hell out of watching next year’s Super Bowl, on TV.

            2. It’s a nice place to watch a game, but the player facilities are awful.

              1. Tough shit. Maybe they should take up a collection among themselves to improve the facilities.

                1. I don’t think digging a giant hole underneath a 100 year old stadium is the kind of thing a collection plate could fund.

                  1. Baseball players make a lot of money.

            3. I bought tickets last week to see the day game April 18th vs. Texas. It will be my wife’s first time Wrigley Field. Damn I love day games at Wrigley.

        2. i just want a winning season. and to murder sid bream for destroying my childhood.

          lousy buccos

          1. They have such a great park. I think the park in Pittsburgh is the best of the new parks.

            1. I’ve heard that from a lot of people. Me and the wife are going to swing out there (and to Jacobs) this summer to see how true it is.

              My favorite park is still Camden. Worst park I’ve ever been to was Shea, though Turner is the worst I’ve seen that’s still in use (and it’s not a bad park; we’re in a golden era). Biggest disappointment was Petco.

              1. I live in Washington and go to Camden every year. And I like Pittsburgh’s better. It is just way cool. And Turner field is just really functional. It is easy to get to and has great sight lines. It may not be a beauty. But if you like baseball, Atlanta is a great town to live in.

                The worst of the new Parks is Nationals Park. It is in a shitty area of town, impossible to get to and has all of the charm of a concrete bunker.

                1. I had such high hopes for Nationals Park. but then i remembered it was DC government.

                  1. NOVA,

                    It is just too bad they had to build it in the District. They could have built it in Alexandria on the water and had it facing the Capitol and had a great view and been in a nice part of town.

                    1. i recall that VA was in the running for awhile, but i don’t think it was ever a real possibility.

                2. It had damn well better be nice. We’re still paying an extra percent sales tax for that fucking thing.

              2. Tropicana is the only bad stadium left.

                1. It’s uninspiring. Then again, I’m not paying for a new one, so there’s that.

            2. It does. they know how to get you in the seats, even if the team won’t. example

              http://pittsburgh.pirates.mlb……ssport.jsp

              1. They used to have all you can eat ballpark food in one of the outfield sections. That was pretty awesome.

                Wasn’t too expensive either.

                1. Dodger Stadium has that in the right field pavilion. All you can eat Dodger Dogs, although truth be told the hot dogs are best in the loge section where they are grilled instead of steamed.

                  1. Cardinals stadium has an all you can eat and drink section in the outfield. Expensive, and I barely remember Pujols hitting a walkoff homer, but fuck yeah!

                  2. The pirates made it seem like they thought that shit up. I should know better than to expect originality and business sense out of pirates management.

        3. Probably be a while after shifting to a more competitive division AND having a lower total payroll than several teams’ infields.

          1. If Billy Beane can do it in Oakland I don’t see why the Astros can’t compete in the AL West, you guys just need a better front office.

            1. I don’t disagree. But while they could reliably count on fighting Pittsburgh and/or Chicago for last place in the NL Central, they lost 20 more games than the last place team in their 2013 division. Then tossed everyone off the team. They have exactly 2 roster postions making over $1M/year, and 2 other invitees (although Ankiel would be a good pickup, I think). I’ve seen AAA teams with better rosters.

    2. I not sure that moving the Cubs to the suburbs would really result in more money for the organization.

      A lot of fans seem to be more attached to Wrigley Field than they are to the Cubs.

      1. Yes it would. the fans would still come and they could have a modern ballpark with tons more revenue streams.

        1. On the one hand, I would be incredibly psyched if I never had to worry again about asshole Cubs fans on the red line and LSD and generally infesting Wrigleyville, which is enough of a clusterfuck as it is.

          On the other hand, Rosemont is already a clusterfuck too and if I have to plan out my trips to O’Hare by consulting a fucking Cubs schedule I’m going to be really annoyed.

          1. After reading that ESPN article, I just want to see the leeches in Wrigleyville finally get theirs.

      2. A lot of fans seem to be more attached to Wrigley Field than they are to the Cubs.

        I’ve never understood this. It’s so old that there’s no one left alive that remembers it from being anything other than a run-down dump.

        I love Dodger Stadium but I’m not outraged that the new ownership is planning on making changes to it in the next decade.

        1. It and Fenway are the only ones left from the golden era of baseball. Granting, it holds the record for most bad baseball ever played in one spot and frankly has more football history than baseball history. But, there is something about going to a game and seeing the spot where so many great players once played, even if nearly all of them were on the opposing teams.

    3. For the 98th straight season, the Chicago Cubs will attempt baseball this season in Wrigley Field.

      LOL

      You hear Boston fans complaining?

      You don’t?

      1. Boston fan here (mostly the other big 3, but into baseball when nothing else is happening): Fuck Fenway.

        1. I have had the Fenway experience many times. And as a tourist, it is great. But I lived in Boston and were an actual Red Sox fan, I would want to burn the place down. It sucks. The seats are uncomfortable. The parking costs $80. Half the time you are behind a poll. A actual modern ball park out on Route 128 where people could get to it that was big enough to make the tickets affordable would be so much better.

          1. Getting to Fenway is super easy if you aren’t a tourist. It’s right on the T and a commuter rail. The location is about the only thing I like about it.

            Well, that and the flock of stupid girls that show up to sit in the bleachers near me.

            1. Yeah, you can take the T. But if you live in the Burbs, getting to the T is a pain in the ass.

              The good news is that they are going to be even more awful than the Yankees this year. So good seats should be available.

              1. Getting to the T isn’t hard. Riverside is basically at 128 and is on the same line. Plus you can take the Framingham line of the commuter rail as well. If you’re north or south instead of west it’s a bit more work, but you can still park at one of the end-of-the-line garages fairly cheaply. Of course, this type of thing is why I don’t live in the burbs yet.

                I decided to pass on multigame packs at face value this year. I’m just going to buy them off people at work or scalp when I want to go.

                1. With the Red Sox being the dysfunctional, unlikable loser team they have been for most of their history, it should feel kind of like a return to normalcy up there this spring.

                  1. I only vaguely remember going to one game before they won in 04. Farm kids in northern Vermont don’t get to make it to big league games much (at least since the Expos moved).

  11. On the bright side, she remains firm she is not a sixth grader…

    1. I believe her. Clearly, she is not even as smart as a fifth-grader.

    2. She’s been on that committee for TWENTY YEARS!

    3. Are You Smarter Than A Sixth Grader? La-la-la!

  12. Mr. Colion Noir interviewed by the NRA.

    Because guns.

  13. Totally OT, no idea what the merits are, passing this along to share my amusement at this terminology:

    Sachin Johan, and a security guard known as Laxman, were arrested on “eve-teasing” charges ? an Indian term for sexual harassment

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new…..India.html

    1. Lax Man to the rescue!

  14. I hope she crys herself to stasis tonight in her preservation chamber.

    1. I hope she didn’t pay too much for that preservation chamber, because it’s doing a shit job.

      1. She’s actually a 2000 year old malevolent spirit.

        1. I stand by my assertion.

          She looks haggard for 2000.

        2. If only the Druids had driven a stake through her heart and burned her body like the Priestess told them too, we wouldn’t be in this mess.

          1. They would’ve… until she successfully banned assault stakes and high capacity fire.

      2. It was paid for by California tax payers. There’s nothing to cut!

  15. I was hoping for a full Senate vote on all this crap. Let every Senator vote on the record.

  16. This is pretty much mission accomplished for her: Proggy street cred bolstered and lots of sweet, sweet TV time. Actually getting the bill passed would be a cherry on top, but its not really what she was after. I mean, she’s a Senator; there’s no reason to believe she cares much about actual legislating, since they expend so little effort on that front.

    1. Are you trying to imply that Obama didn’t put in tireless hours legislating in his time present in the Senate?

      1. Don’t know why he isn’t. Low hanging fruit, etc.

  17. I see CO is going to pass its Bloomberg gun law. What a shame. I have a decent-sized stack of deer and elk license preference points in CO, but seeing as I’ll be boycotting the state now, I guess they’ll just go to waste.

    I’ll be drafting a letter to CO Parks Dept to let them know. Maybe I’ll copy some of the newspapers, too.

    1. What’s the deal with this?

      1. Hickenlooper will cave:

        Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper says he will sign gun control measures Wednesday that restrict the size of gun magazines and expand background checks for firearms buyers.

        Hickenlooper’s spokesman, Eric Brown, told 7NEWS the governor will sign the bills on Wednesday.

        http://www.thedenverchannel.co…..lls-the-ap

        Fuck CO. For that kind of hunting trip, I go business class and usually drop thousands of bucks, all told. Not in CO, not now.

        1. I am sure Wyoming and Idaho will be glad to take your money. Just a guess, but I bet Hickenlooper just signed his own political death warrant.

          1. I am sure Wyoming and Idaho will be glad to take your money. Just a guess, but I bet Hickenlooper just signed his own political death warrant.

            I hope so, but I knew he would be a disaster as a gov. Looks like I was right.

            1. Anyone who has a name like “Hickenlooper” and doesn’t change it to something else, can’t be very bright.

              1. Sounds like Schicklgruber to me.

              2. Honestly, he could be named “Smith”: all you ever needed to know about the asshole was that he was mayor of Denver.

        2. My parents spend at least 2 weeks a year hunting out west. Normally it’s Ohio and Iowa, but they have done Colorado before. I’ll make sure to convince them not to go back.

          1. Send them python hunting in Florida.

            1. My dad does want to go turkey hunting in Florida with me at some point to complete the “Grand Slam”.

              1. We’ve got turkeys, that’s for sure. I saw a bunch outside of Steinhatchee some years back. We were there for scallop season, but I saw them when we were driving up the coast for something or other.

                But why miss out on pythons?

          2. Ohio and Iowa are WEST?

            Oh, that’s right, Newton is WEST as well. nevermind.

    2. Yeah, how did this sneak by?

      1. Progressives in California escaped to the greener pastures of Colorado and proceeded to turn it into California Jr.

        1. They’re doing the same thing to Nevada and Arizona as well.

          1. Statism is a disease that spreads via human vectors.

            1. So we should shoot Californians, New Yorkers, and Illinoians on sight, just in case?

              But I like sloopy, banjos, and the LTC.

              1. they’ll hole up for awhile and be okay.

              2. You don’t have to kill the vectors. Just isolate them or vaccinate against the underlying disease.

        2. Here in Shillinois, we’ve managed to concentrate our derp in Chicago and Springfield.

          1. Super concentrated.

            Just was listening to ILGA debate about requiring a 1,000,000 insurance policy for people who are issued a Concealed Carry permit.

            Says it would ONLY cost 1500 to 2000 a year and thinks that is totally reasonable.

            1. But what happens when Illinois starts issuing concealed carry and someone has concealed carry from Utah or Florida? Those don’t require a million insurance, and the state I think will be legally obligated to recognize them.

              1. States don’t have to reciprocate.

                1. Full faith and credit for the win.

                2. Not now. Let’s see what happens if SCOTUS rules that states are required to recognize gay marriage licenses issued in another state. On what basis will they be able to refuse to recognize concealed carry licenses issued in another state.

              2. Chicago cops will still arrest you and take your gun.

              3. The amendment failed big time, so its kind of moot.

                Utah probably wouldn’t be recognized in Illinois, except for Illinois residents during the interim period where the State Police are setting up the permit system.

                Florida probably will be recognized since it requires live fire. That is of course assuming that we get Shall Issue instead of May Issue.

                I just wish they would quit playing stupid games with this. They have devoted five days of debate to Concealed Carry, mostly on amendments that would make CC almost impossible.

        3. Austin has a fucking plastic bag ban. While visiting, we stopped in Walmart for drinks and snacks. Walmart’s solution? Hide the paper bags and put shoplifting tags on the carryout baskets. Fucking do-gooders. It isn’t enough that they do the good, noooo. They have to make sure everyone else does what they consider the good, too. Fuckers. I’m pretty sure at this point that the foodtrucks downtown are all paying protection for their spots, too.

          1. Fuck. Austin and CO are my two main out-of-state job application places. If progressive derp is becoming a voting majority there, I’m not sure where to go. Houston, maybe?

          2. Government is the modern Progressive version of religion. They have this mushy mess of unformed moral judgements: All people must get everything they want, all the time, and I have the right to demand other people’s money in order to pay for my, vastly superior, sense of moral indignation.

            It isn’t enough that they be allowed to preach, they demand that you live by their standards, lest they cast you out and condemn you to hell.

          3. Target still had free paper bags last time I was there (post bag-ban). 7-11’s and shit like that have no bags at all. At least not for free. If you really need a bag, everything just costs 18c or 35c more.

            I’m thinking that there might be a business opportunity for easily carried and easily dispensable plastic bags that are just like the old ones, that you could carry in to places and have them fill those up for you. Maybe some kind of wearable fanny-pack like dispensing apparatus.

            It’d be worth it just for that one time when some jackass tries to give me a hard time for it and I get to tell him to go fuck himself in the ass with rusty shovel. Hopefully at least one of my kids is with me when that happens.

          4. Got this in parts of California. Fresh and Easy still has paper bags you can use, but Safeway hides the paper bags because they are afraid people will use them without paying for them. You have to actually buy a bag at the self service before a clerk will bring one over to you. Fuck Safeway for assuming I’m a criminal.

            1. now I wonder if I actually payed for the paper bag at target and cashier just didn’t tell me about it. It was only a day or two after the ban went into effect, so she might not have had her new script down yet.

      2. It was the sequester.

        1. Also, BOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSHHHH

  18. SAVOR THE SWEET, SWEET TEARS OF THE NEW YORK TIMES =

    Say Goodbye to the Assault Weapons Ban

    By DAVID FIRESTONE

    Fans of military-style assault weapons can stop worrying ? their gun lobby has done its work, and all but assured that Congress will not pass a ban on their dangerous toys.

    the tears are few, because they pivot to Colorado’s betrayal of its citizenry as a sign of ‘political courage’ (suicide? How Hickenlooper ???gets treated by voters will send a signal to everyone across the nation – defy your citizens at your peril)

    … but enjoy them while ye may. Bwooo hahahahaha!!

    1. RRRAGRGH BLARGH POWERFUL GUN INTERESTS

      1. regarding these “powerful gun interests” = virtually zero of the progtards seem to grasp that the NRA is a “powerful” lobby precisely because they have *millions* of actively-supporting members. They seem to think a few enormous gun companies pull the levers of power, not actual pro-second amendment citizens… never heard of them! they’re all “fringe extremists” and conspiracy theorists to the gun-grabbers. they genuinely think they themselves represent the vast majority, revealing just how out of touch they are with average americans

    2. jwalker99
      Foothill Ranch, CA

      We are lost as a country.

      Jaleh
      Aspen

      Depressing!

      Peter Myette
      New York, NY
      ..
      Where’s Joe Biden? In cover story after cover story, we were assured that he was the unbendable force for good, the relentless champion of a new assault weapons ban. Vice President Biden would impose an LBJ-style, withering directive on his former Senate colleagues, exposing the timidity of Harry Reid’s measures and exhorting senators to do the right thing….

      Genevieve
      San Diego
      ..
      Since when did the NRA run the country? How is it they have Congress in their pocket?

      cedarpruitt
      Boston, MA
      ..
      The NRA is so evil. I cannot believe anyone would ever consider assault weapon ownership a “right.”

      MariannaNYC
      Manhattan, NY
      ..
      What a bunch of cowards. What a disgusting band of cowards and undeserving people….The right to BEAR arms was a right dated 200 years ago. Get a knife. That’s an arm. Women did not even have a right to vote back then! Children were working in the fields. The world is changing, but the greed for money (and blood, at this point) of certain segments of society and the obtusity of others remains, carved in stone, immovable, atrocious, deadly, like their stupidity.

      i note that the majority of the wailing commenters already live in states where its virtually impossible to own a gun

      ahh, sweet sweet tears

  19. When is Hickengruber up for re-election, anyway?

    1. Next year, I understand.

      his very-public crucifixion will send a lasting message to governors around the country*

      *i.e. not NY or Cali or Chicago-stan

    2. He has already publicly admitted that this move will cost him the election. No doubt he expects a cushy little appointment from his masters. Fuck him and his beer.

      1. Drink Pennsylvania beer. We’re gun friendly, and some Troegs Perpetual IPA or Victory Hopdevil IPA will hit you harder than a .45 ACP.

        1. There is one chili beer he makes that I will miss. Its the only spicy beer I like, will have to find another…

  20. I wish they had recorded a vote.

    1. i believe the whole point of this fiasco was that no one had the balls to be on the record, and so they scuttled the ship, killed the baby in the cradle, pulled the plug on granny…oh, and dumped the AWB bill too.

  21. So we win on a bill like the AWB that really doesn’t make much difference.

    Now in the spirit of bipartisanship the GOP will cave on immigration/amnesty, which will make a huge difference in our country.

  22. Man who does that dude think he is? Wow.

    http://www.PC-Privacy.tk

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.