From her speech yesterday in the Senate. You can find this in the Congressional Record for 1/24/2013 page 59 (S291).

 

"Put simply, we cannot allow the rights of a few to override the safety of all. That is not the America that our founding fathers envisioned. And that is not the America I want my children and grandchildren to live in."

 

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2013-01-24/pdf/CREC-2013-01-24.pdf

Context is always good.

 

Can you provide some for us?

?

 

She said it during the press conference she had introducing the bill?

Context is always good.

 

Can you provide some for us?

 

But we need to ask ourselves:

Do we let the gun industry take over

and dictate policy to this country? Do

we let those who profit from increasing

sales of these military style-weapons

prevent us from taking commonsense

steps to stop the carnage?

Or should we empower our elected

representatives to vote their conscience

based on their experience,

based on their sense of right and wrong

and based on their need to protect

their schools, their malls, their workplaces

and their businesses?

This legislation is my life’s goal. As

long as I am a member of the Senate,

I will work night and day to pass this

bill into law. No matter how long it

takes, I will fight until assault weapons

are taken off our streets.

Put simply, we cannot allow the

rights of a few to override the safety of

all. That is not the America that our

founding fathers envisioned. And that

is not the America I want my children

and grandchildren to live in.

So I ask everyone watching at home:

please get involved and stay involved.

The success or failure of this bill depends

not on me, but on you. If the

American people rise up and demand

action from their elected officials, we

will be victorious. If the American people

say ‘‘no’’ to military-style assault

weapons, we will rid our Nation of this

scourge.

Please,

 

Does this help?

Assault weapons?

 

She confuses the gun industry taking over and dictating policy to this country with THIS ADMINISTRATION doing exactly that. What a conniving, lying piece of garbage!

I wonder why there was not this outrage and associated action after the Foot Hood shootings.

 

It seems they were waiting for the right 'trigger event' so spring all these actions.

Remember the left are the ones that refuse to describe Fort Hood as terrorism, they call it workplace violence.

Does she have armed guards? She can be the first on the list to have a secret service protection with just a 10 round clip. Preferably one that has to be cocked back after each shot.

Remember the left are the ones that refuse to describe Fort Hood as terrorism, they call it workplace violence.

 

Yep.

 

And it was a 'gun free zone' - tragically ironic since it was military base. By putting the 2nd Amendment in abeyance on a government installation soldiers were deprived of their Constitutional (and natural) right to self defense. And 13 were deprived of their right to life.

 

A list of gun free zone (2nd Amendment in abeyance) mass shootings:

 

- Sandy Hook

- Aurora Co.

- Columbine High school, near Aurora Co.

- Lundy's Killeen, Tx.

- Ft. Hood, outside of Killeen Tx.

- Va. Tech

- Texas University

- Gifford political rally, Arizona

 

The common thread is not access to guns it is setting aside a basic, human right - the right to self defense.

Does she have armed guards? She can be the first on the list to have a secret service protection with just a 10 round clip. Preferably one that has to be cocked back after each shot.

 

Now that's just not the same marvel because she's an elected official that deserves better protection than average joes like ourselves due to her high profile and what not.......:idunno:

These idiot liberals trying to take away gun rights need to be taken away forever.

In the words of Rand Paul “Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so”

Does this help?

 

Thank you.

In the words of Rand Paul “Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so”

 

And history will back those words.

In the words of Rand Paul “Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so”

 

So would you support the government if they declared Martial Law and decided that only military and law enforcement could possess guns? Thus coming and confiscating everyone's firearms?