Sneaky Dems Attempt Gun Control In CyberSecurity Bill

Democrat Senators have offered an amendment to the cybersecurity bill that would limit the purchase of high capacity gun magazines. May I ask what in the world high capacity gun magazines have to do with cybersecurity? I already know. They have nothing to do with it, but this is how our Congress works.

However, with this particular amendment, S.A.2575, was sponsored by Democrats Frank Lautenberg (N.J.), Barbara Boxer (Calif.), Jack Reed (R.I.), Bob Menendez (N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Schumer and Dianne Feinstein (Calif.). These liberal Senators are looking to make it illegal to transfer or posses large capacity devices that feed guns more than 10 rounds with the exception of .22 caliber rim fire ammunition. Apparently you can have a thousand round drum of those on your weapon and you're ok.

The amendment is identical to a different bill that was sponsored by Frank Lautenberg.

In the first place, the stupid thing about the law is that it would only affect these devices that were sold or transferred after the law took effect. So people they are afraid of can still legally own these, just as long as they got them before the law was in effect. That makes absolutely no sense.

Chuck Shumer, the New York Democrat, and yes this is the same New York that gave the country the likes of Mayor Michael Bloomberg, was pushing for passage of this amendment.

“Maybe we could come together on guns if each side gave some,” Schumer said.

Mr. Schumer seems oblivious that the only people that have compromised are Republicans and frankly they need to stop compromising. That's what gets us into this mess in the first place. The gun control laws on the books are the result of Democrats calling for more gun control and Republicans caving to that demand. The more we compromise, the further left we drift.

I think we can find common ground. Stop making new gun control laws Mr. Schumer. The government has tens of thousands of gun laws on the books now and they don't stop all the things you claim they will stop.

“The basic complaint is that the Chuck Schumers of the world want to take away your guns,” Schumer said of the argument made by gun lobbies. “I think it would be smart for those of us who want rational gun control to make it know that that’s not true at all.”

It is true. Liberals like Chuck Schumer think that by disarming the population they can get a better handle on crime and control the people. What they fail to see is that the very people they are out to stop do not adhere to their laws, which is why they are called criminals. That's C-R-I-M-I-N-A-L-S. As Rush says, "For those in Rio Linda" that means they are guilty of a crime, which means they violate the law. They disregard it. They oppose the law. The law simply defines who the criminals are and in this case, with this amendment, people, such as myself, who would seek to purchase a magazine for their Glock, or 1911 or AR-15 that would have more than 10 rounds, would become a criminal. See how that works?

“We can debate where to draw the line of reasonableness, but we might be able to come to an agreement in the middle,” Schumer said. “Maybe, maybe, maybe we can pass some laws that might, might, might stop some of the unnecessary casualties … maybe there’s a way we can come together and try to break through the log jam and make sure the country is a better place.”

OK, there are a lot of 'maybes' and 'mights' in Schumer's statements here. "Mights" and "Maybes" are what the left always use to try and push their agenda. There is never a definitive "this will work and here's how."This kind of argument is emotional, not logical. The only way this will "make the country a better place" is for people like Charles Schumer to stay out of the gun marketplace and allow Americans the ability to purchase a weapon of choice for whatever they intend to use it for, whether it is hunting or sport shooting or self defense.

While Schumer also decried assault weapons and said that average Americans didn't need such a weapon to go hunting or protect themselves, he is not to determine such things. Tell that to the victims of the tyrannical government under Bill Clinton and Janet Reno that brought bloodshed in both Waco, TX and Ruby Ridge for no real reason or threat. Americans should be able to purchase whatever weapons are on the market. Laws are in place to make sure that legal transactions are checked thoroughly. Those criminals that are intent on getting high capacity magazines are going to do it despite Schumer and the Democrats passing a million laws and the law-abiding citizens are the ones that will pay for their stupidity.

This bill is set to be voted on next week.

Here's a montage of what Capitol Hill has to say about gun control. I think you'll find Sen. Schumer's call for limiting the Second Amendment in contradiction to his above claims.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

390 thoughts on “Sneaky Dems Attempt Gun Control In CyberSecurity Bill

  1. There is not discussion..the second amendment stands as is.. all of our representatives would do well to read anything before they pass anything..

  2. "Laws are in place to make sure that legal transactions are checked thoroughly".

    LMAO. He can't be serious. There are no no checks on private sales. Criminals do not need to resort to theft of guns when they can just purchase a gun online no questions asked. All of you hillbillies are enablers of crime not a deterrent of crime.

  3. politicstick says:

    What most people are failing to realize is this whole game is a distraction. Little laws like this are simply a rouse to erode our 4th amendment rights. They will use these laws to set up check points and for "probable cause" to do ILLEGAL "searches and seizures!

  4. I hate these people!!!!!!!!!

  5. I'm sorry guys. We've been trying to vote out Rottenburg and Menedez for years now but its hard to get rid of roaches when idiots keep feeding them.

  6. Carl Stevenson says:

    They should come personally and try to take them.

  7. Sad-Day-in-America-11-6-12 says:

    . . . that we will be, not than we will be -- no way to edit our posts here?

  8. Sad-Day-in-America-11-6-12 says:

    Every one of them are traitors to America and our Constitution. It won't be long, no more than 4 years, than we will be United Socialist States of America.

  9. Schumer's such a hypocrit, he hides behind a wall of armed security guards, as does every other democrat that is pushing this crap, they could care less about crime, public safety, or citizens rights, all they care about is power and control, pure and simple, power and control.

  10. OK, so we can read all the tired pro-gun rhetoric below, and beat our chests in our "righteousness", repeating the paranoia that "they're out to get out guns". Except that it's not true. All Shumer et al are striving for is some sensible restrictions to over-kill. Weapons of war belong in wars, not homes. You will note that the legislators who support this are primarily East Coast/West Coast, where we have an extraordinary amount of gun violence. Take note too, the proponents of control of assault weapons comes from both sides of the aisle. I'm referring here to the Governors/Mayors who have banded together to urge sensible gun control.

    You want to hunt? Fine. You want to do target practice? No one cares. You want to collect guns, no problem. What do you need with large capacity magazines with rapid fire capabilities?

    And if your logic is that "if they want them, they'll find a way to get them anyway so we may as well let them have them".... They why don't you apply the same logic to drugs? Just make everything legal. Why have any laws at all?

  11. Technically_Speaking says:

    @Georgetheclown: The average response time of a 911 call is 23 minutes; the average response time of a .357 is 1400 feet per second.

  12. Chuck the schmuck strikes again. He's not a liberal he's a communist! He and Bloomers are at the top of the list for trying to disarm our citizens. That alone should tell you what side they're on. Just listen to their words and watch their actions. They'll give themselves away every time!

  13. WarinaBuffetina2 says:

    I have a friend in Germany who is a socialist. She has simply 'grown up' that way and is UNAWARE that her politics are socialist, as she has NEVER experienced a more 'independent' culture like in America. Last week she said, "Everyone should give up their guns; people should not be allowed to keep a gun in their home." She was the true voice of an innocent, but brainwashed, socialist.

  14. Congress is getting to be just like the California legislature. Massive deficits,high unemployment, growing welfare rolls, and what's Schumer and the gang doing? Going after magazines on firearms or staying awake nights trying to come up with more gun laws. I still say Aurora,CO was Fast n' Furious II. When are stupid New York voters going to wise up and fire Schumer? The man continues to have an I.Q. matched only by his shoe size.

  15. Personally, I do not think that Schumer is as ignorant as you think he may be. This goes much deeper than you may think. Total control of the American public is what Schumer and others are after. If criminals are the only individuals that have guns and the American citizen is disarmed, only government can protect the American citizen. Socialism by default is then realized.

  16. GUN CONTROL? For the progressing {backwards} Libs this has nothing, absolutely nothing do with guns, but its all about CONTROL!

  17. The founding fathers knew that an unarmed populous would be at the mercy of their own government and would eventually find themselves oppressed and enslaved. If the people in that theater in Colorado had all been armed, that crack-pot would have thought twice, unless he had a death wish, because he would have been dead as soon as it was recognized that he was actually shooting to kill. The administration is afraid of an armed populous because it knows that they would use their weapons to remain free if they were attacked by its goons. Remember that the German people were all disarmed after WWI and were unable to fight when the Nazis took over.

  18. Go to any gun show,like the one in Memphis this past weekend, and you don't have to worry about being victimized by anybody. You can leave your car open and not worry because everyone knows that the people around you are armed. Those that would take advantage don't because they don't want to get shot. Legislators can't use an example that is the exception like CO and make it the norm in order to make laws.