Via Ace of Spades HQ:
The Senate Judiciary Committee approved a ban on the sale and manufacture of more than 150 types of semi-automatic weapons with military-style features Thursday in a party-line vote.
The 10-8 vote came after a heated exchange between Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who Feinstein scolded for giving her a “lecture” on the Constitution.
[…]
Feinstein became furious at one point with Cruz, who she saw as lecturing to her about the meaning of the Constitution and why the framers of that document used certain language.
“I’m not a sixth grader,” she told the freshman Tea Party favorite. “I’m not a lawyer, but after 20 years I’ve been up close and personal to the Constitution. I have great respect for it … it’s fine you want to lecture me on the Constitution. I appreciate it. Just know I’ve been here for a long time. I’ve passed on a number of bills. I’ve studied the Constitution myself. I am reasonably well educated, and I thank you for the lecture.”
Cruz responded by asking Feinstein if she also thought she had the power to interpret the First Amendment by deciding what books people could read.
DiFi took office back in 1992. I voted for her but my esteem for her has diminished over the years.
I never much cared for the Senate’s seniority rules. If I vote for a new Senator and he/she wins, I don’t want to have to wait a couple decades for them to start being effective. Apparently Ted Cruz agrees with me.
The Crawdad Hole 
brought this up from downstairs
http://wwwwakeupamericans-spree.blogspot.com/2013/03/video-senator-cruz-educates-senator.html
the republicans have a group of youngsters that are going to have great impact on their party and I think for the better.
Paul Ryan — Rand Paul — Ted Cruz and a few others seem to understand that at this time in the history of our country you have to stand up and be counted, not just go along to get along
Love that.
This response is the first specific argument I can take for why ‘all guns’ should be protected.
Once you say, “not this gun, but that one’s OK”… it starts to make you shiver when you consider, “Not this book, but that one’s OK?”
Up until now, I wasn’t a fan of Assault-Style rifles – I personally will not have a gun in my house… but I have no problem with someone else owning whatever weapons they want, I can always choose not to visit, and there are plenty of laws against using those weapons when not protecting oneself.
I voted for DiFi, and have always been a staunch supporter – and will likely be a supporter in the future, but this argument is moot for me. I don’t have to agree with her on everything, but I can call her out when I disagree.
thanks for posting this.
jeffhas, there was a time when I would have dismissed such hypothetical concerns with, “Oh, don’t be silly, it’s not like any administration would ever actually *do* that!”
There was a time when I had an underlying trust that whoever we elected, from either party, had a basic respect for the Bill of Rights. That even if they kinda sorta might fudge it here and there for practical reasons, the bedrock of belief in our Constitutional limitations remained. I believed that while our elected officials might sometimes fail at guarding those ideals, and blur the lines slightly, they at least *had* those ideals, and knew where the lines truly were, even as they sometimes snuck a toe over them.
After Bush and Obama, I no longer have that trust. I no longer have confidence that those we elect will not trash any damn principle they please, and leave any right in the dust, if they think it expedient and necessary and for the good of society.
It is THEIR behavior that is pushing me toward being a hardline constitutionalist with no exceptions, period.
honk.
I could live with a sensible assault weapons ban. We live with a ban on automatic weapons that makes just as much 2A sense as an AW ban would.
But they the gun-grabbers wouldn’t stop there. They would just keep coming back and coming back for more. Meanwhile they would hire armed guards or police to protect themselves and their families in their enclaves and gated communities.
Exactly, myiq. They are on tape saying quite openly that the only reason they are not seeking to ban hand guns, etc right now is because they know it wouldn’t fly. But many of them want to. They admit as much.
And if we accept the legal reasoning of the “why” this ban needs to be done, then we haven’t a leg to stand on when they move to the next one.
me too
My favorite part? When he thanks her for acknowledging that Texas even has books. I think that bit of snark flew right over her head, but it cracked me the hell up. He should have followed up with “We have indoor toilets, too!”
But yeah, regardless of whether you think there is an argument for any limits at all on various rights, Feinstein didn’t want to argue it. She just wanted to tell the young whippersnapper to get off her seniority lawn, and show proper deference to his elders.
She reminded him of her Seniority too. ::roll:
She was all like “how dare you!” LOL
Just wait, the meme is gonna be Ted Cruz was ageist & sexist by daring to ask her a question.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/03/14/senator-leahy-Angrily-Offended-By-New-Senator-Cruz-bring-up-the-constitution
that young whippersnapper must be doing something right?
He upset Leahy too
Great it is about time.. 🙂
DiFi: “Do they need a bazooka?, Do they need other High-powered military weapons that are used in close combat?”
I just can’t stop thinking…
Do we need War and Peace?… Do we need Mein Kampf?… Do we need Gone with the Wind?
Chilling to me. Totally changes my perspective.
Is there any need for that anarchist website? Or that communist one? It does no public good, and may actually incite harm. You know, people who commit masscres often surf sites like that.
Let’s ban it. For safety. For The Children.
I do love how they go to “certain types of Pornography” (ChildPorn)…
Yeah, but there are already laws on the books outlawing the exploitation of kids, and taking pics of them in the nude, etc.
It still gets back to individual rights. Child porn is illegal because children can’t consent, therefore any porn done with them is a violation of their rights. Duh. I have no prob with adult porn, at least not in the criminalize-it sense.
It is an excellent analogy – one that could have been in a SCOTUS hearing.
BTW – The gun that Dan White used to kill George Moscone and Harvey Milk would not be affected by this proposed bill. He used a .38 revolver, not an assault rifle.
John Nolte:
What’s funny is that most gun-owners I know are all for coming down like a ton of bricks on actual violent gun crime. Anyone can have any gun they want, but if you rob or murder with it, you go away for a long, looong time if not forever.
And why don’t the people so concerned about accidental gun deaths push for more publicly available or even FREE training in gun safety and handling? Give tax credits for gun safes and safety courses? Of course not. Because it’s really about the control, not about the guns.
Gun owners tend to be law and order types, not touchy-feely bleeding hearts.
Yep. Leave people alone and MYOB unless they actually physically transgress on someone else’s rights, then you knock the shit out of them. It tends to be both their personal view, and their view of how govt ought to function.
Honk
These Dems don’t understand who Cruz is. He is a shark. He was an incredibly successful corporate trial lawyer. He was appointed state solicitor general because he wanted to enter politics. He went to Princeton AND Harvard. He is rich and made his own money. His father is from an elite Cuban family who left during Castro. His mother is from Baltimore. Both parents worked for oil companies in Houston. These slimy Obama enablers are pissed off that a “Hispanic” is not a Dem. Yes he is Hispanic in the same way that Juan Carlos of Spain is. And he is EXTREMELY conservative.
The man argued before the Supreme Court 9 times. And won some. He did private work for multinationals navigating treaties, tariffs, etc. And was veeery very good at it.
Feinstein sneeringly implying that he might have a few vague ill-informed thoughts or minor “bumpkin” experience re: constitutional law was asinine.
According to the media he is a nutball Tea Partier.
Rand Paul is a little nutty on some issues, but that’s okay while he’s a Senator.
A few nuts baked in the cake add flavor and texture.
I’m not a full-on isolationist. But I think those that are are needed, because the tendency the other way is so far gone that a few libertarians in there pushing for ZERO involvements is a good thing, IMO.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Cruz
Jeebus and there is more
Notice this comparison to above: “Obama is a graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School, where he was president of the Harvard Law Review.”
And never published anything.
Yep. Cruz tends to kind of suck at vague inspirational stump speeches. But he will knife you 12 ways sideways in a damn debate. He relishes it. The man is smart as fuck, and well-honed. Unlike the pampered narcissist, he LOVES being challenged, just to have the chance to eviscerate you.
I’m not saying he’s always right. But he’s no shallow-thinking bumpkin, and trying to frame him that way is going to bite the Dems right in the ass.
I can’t wait. 🙂
But he seems like such a nice young man 😉
If you go to Cruz’s wikipedia page above you will see that he actually argued the Heller case before SCOTUS. Which makes DiFi and Dick Durbin quoting Heller even more amusing.
This video is even better. He goes back to Heller (which they brought up), and destroys DiFi and Durbin.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/03/14/senator-leahy-Angrily-Offended-By-New-Senator-Cruz-bring-up-the-constitution
I’d love to see him and Obama in a constitutional debate. The AA faux constitutional “professor” versus the hispanic experienced litigator.
Just don’t let Candy Crowley moderate.
AMEN , but he might eviscerate her too , and I would pay to see that !
Cruz has the career that Obama always claims he gave up to go community organize in Chicago.
As if, Obama would ever work that hard or was actually selfless enough to serve the poor, graft free. 😆
Hey , wait a minute … You mean we actually know what Ted Cruz actually did in school and his records aren’t sealed? “faints”
Refreshing, ain’t it? I’ll bet you could also find tons of fellow-students who knew him back in the day as well. We still have no idea who Obama hung out with, or where.
Imagine if you were applying for a top job and they asked for your school transcripts but you refused to produce them.
They would automatically round-file your application.
I don’t know how much more refreshing I can take 😉 , This could get so much more interesting . Passes the popcorn ..
Let’s see, he had 2-3 composite girlfriends, and his Pakistani roommate who won’t kiss and tell.
Then there was . . . uh . . . .
I love seeing the old guard getting all shook up. 🙂
No, no, NO!
The Democrats are the rebels and outsiders. They can’t be the establishment!
OT-
http://gma.yahoo.com/white-house-launches-being-biden-series-190008123–abc-news-politics.html
Go read the rest- responsible gun ownership, blah blah blah, Second Amendment, blah blah, Sandy Hook, yada yada yada
Seriously though- The White House launches a “Being Biden” series?
Snark takeover in 3,2……..
I just saw that and was going to bring it over. anybody get the feeling that if it is unedited, it will be like watching a train wreck
here is the link I had
http://weaselzippers.us/2013/03/14/prayers-answered-white-house-launches-being-biden-audio-series/
read the comments
Is this some kind of sneaky way to get the public to support death panels? It will be like – ok, you gotta choice – death panel or watching Being Biden.
The thing about gun laws is that the only people who follow them are going to be law abiding citizens who care about the law. I don’t know what the statistics are, but I doubt most mass murderers go through the gun permit process. The Sandy Hook murderer stole his guns. So do most of the gang bangers in my area, they either steal their guns or buy them illegally on the street.
What I don’t understand is why we don’t really nail people who have illegal guns and commit crimes with them? I get so tired of hearing about some 30 year old who gets out of jail for multiple gun crimes…and shoots a bunch of people. WTH did we let him out of prison for? Or the kid with rape, manslaughter, and armed robbery charges, who just robbed another store. WTH was he back out on the street?
It seems like we always put all our effort and restrictions on law abiding citizens while completely ignoring criminals.
We have to let the violent criminals out of prison to make room for the pot dealers.
Exactly. There would be plenty of money to jail and care for the truly violent, if we stopped the jail time for stupid shit.
http://freebeacon.com/marco-rubios-remarks-at-cpac-2013/
Rubio’s comments at CPAC
http://freebeacon.com/rand-pauls-full-remarks-at-cpac-2013/
Rand Paul’s remarks at CPAC
Give me a few minutes and I’ll front page this one too.
Front paged
“I could live with a sensible assault weapons ban. We live with a ban on automatic weapons ..”
********
Full auto weapons can be legally owned in many states; lots of Fed. rules about what type but basically back ground check and $200 Fed tax for permit. “Back in the day”, I owned a .45 cal sub-machine gun with a silencer….$200 tax for the gun, $200 tax for the silencer.
Works for me.
That might be close to the truth. He’s such a narcissist,I think he only does things for his own gain. I’m not sure he has any politics beyond himself.