U.S. Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer: Americans don't need semi-auto weapons.

[GreenStormCloud]

On Tuesday, Lanny Breuer, Assistant Attorney General for the Department of Justice’s Criminal Division, testified before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism. In answering a question from Senator Sen. Dianne Feinstein he said, "Very few hunters in the United States or sports people and law-abiding people really need to have semiautomatic weapons or long guns. . . .”

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=7165

Many here will object to the use of NRA-ILA as a news source. If so then prove that Mr. Breuer didn't say what he is reported to have said.

In that statement we see the mindset of some in the DOJ. They want to gut the Second Amendment.

[jmg257]

1. Discussed here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=475464&mesg_id=475464

[safeinOhio]

2. Crazy people on the extremes

NRA endorses shoving military type weapon down the throats of the President and liberal members of congress.
video- NRA Board of Directors and spokesperson for the NRA says what the NRA wants to do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vy8RIiTyhMI

So who is the more nuts?

[beevul]

3. A better question...

A better question is:

Which one has the ability to directly effect Americans through involvement in administrative rule making without congressional oversight?

That question is more germane to this discussion.

For extra credit:

Which one is involved up to his ears in fast and furious?

Care to take a stab at some answers?

[safeinOhio]

17. You mean the program started by Bush?

Looks like the DOJ and ATF do a lot more than fast and furious.

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2011/10/27/police-atf-agents-make-arrest-in-shooting-of-clairton-police-officer/
http://www.callandpost.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1181:cleveland-police-fbi-atf-makes-13-gun-related-arrests&catid=170:cleveland-city-hall&Itemid=647

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/atf-makes-first-federal-arrest-in-new-orleans-54731152.html
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-10-28/us/us_virginia-atf-sting_1_atf-sting-undercover-agent-machine-guns?_s=PM:US
http://www.zimbio.com/Barack+Obama/articles/2580/ATF+Arrest+Men+Plotting+Assassinate+Obama
http://www.accessnorthga.com/detail.php?n=242913
http://easley.patch.com/articles/atf-takes-mauldin-resident-into-custody

[beevul]

43. Such a bold claim.

Too bad it is so easily disproven:

Headlined "Meeting of the attorney general with Mexican Attorney General Medina Mora," the briefing paper informed Mukasey that the tactic had been tried unsuccessfully but that the ATF wanted to try again and wanted Mukasey to persuade Mexico's attorney general to provide a team of corruption-free Mexican agents who would assist in the effort. Perhaps implied but not fully detailed in this document was the reason for the failure _ that Mexican authorities south of the border fell down on the job, claiming they didn't see the vehicle carrying the guns that the ATF agents had alerted them to.

http://azstarnet.com/news/national/ap-exclusive-second-bush-era-gun-smuggling-probe/article_02a80836-5f2b-51ce-a67c-06a0833b0181.html


On the other hand, where fast and furious is concerned, we have this:

Soon the scandalous truth came out. It was so shocking that the atf agents couldn’t believe it. When it proved out, they were profoundly embarrassed about their country. They were deeply apologetic to their Mexican counterparts. They scrambled to distance themselves from what had happened. “I hope they understand that this was kept secret from most of the atf, including me and my colleagues in Mexico,” said Darren Gil, the atf attaché to Mexico.

http://www.thetrumpet.com/?q=8786.7541.0.0

Gil said when he first queried ATF officials in Phoenix, where the program was run, they told him the bare minimum. According to Gil, George Gillett Jr., then the acting special agent in charge, said, "We have an ongoing investigation…. Thanks for calling."

He also questioned ATF headquarters in Washington, Gil said, and was told, "They have it under control."

As he learned what had gone wrong, Gil said, he realized that ATF officials did not want Pascual to know about the operation, and that ATF feared the Mexican government would find out and lodge a formal complaint.

Gil recalled "screaming and yelling" with his Washington superiors. "It's inconceivable to me to even allow weapons to knowingly cross an international border," he said.

Gil and Canino said they later were advised that senior ATF leaders, including acting Director Kenneth Melson, as well as Department of Justice officials and the U.S. attorney's office in Phoenix, all had approved Fast and Furious. Melson said it was "providing some good intelligence" on gun smuggling.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/26/nation/la-na-fast-furious-cable-20110726

Heres Darren Gil in front of the whole world:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7360785n

So really, when you talk about "wide receiver" versus "gunwalker", you're talking apples and oranges, since NO MECHANISM was used, attempted, or even discussed where gunwalker is concerned.

In fact, David Voth (iirc) was said to have been "giddy" when F&F weapons began turning up at crime scenes:

"The supervisor of Operation Fast and Furious was “jovial, if not, not giddy but just delighted about” walked guns showing up at crime scenes in Mexico according to an ATF agent."


http://oversight.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1341:report-four-atf-agents-working-on-controversial-operation-fast-and-furious-tell-their-story&catid=22:releasesstatements


This administration owns fast and furious, for better or worse.



That being said, back to the topic at hand:

Which one has the ability to directly effect Americans through involvement in administrative rule making without congressional oversight?

That question is more germane to this discussion.

For extra credit:

Which one is involved up to his ears in fast and furious?

Third and NEW bonus question:

If Voth or ANY of the others involved are bush people, WHY have the been protected rather than fired, hmm?



Checkmate.

[GreenStormCloud]

4. So you also wish to ban semi-auto guns? N/T

[safeinOhio]

6. No not at all.

I just want to expose the NRA for what it is, a violent right wing, dangerous organization that promotes violence against those that disagree with their agenda. While there are many views among some in this administration, the one pointed out has few that agree with it. I'm afraid that there are many that agree or follow the Motor City Madman. The crowd is cheering him in the video and there is no crowd cheering this witness. Just as you point out the comments of one unknown individual in the DOJ, it is important to point out the agenda of the top people in the NRA that thru their political funding influence way more people and politicians than a low level bureaucrat that no one has ever heard of. Just as the NRA will use his statements to invoke fear among it's members, I think it is fair to point out statements from NRA spokes persons. I think both sides are just as crazy and dangerous. Both need to be exposed for their radicalism. I do feel one side is more dangerous than the other. Note the recent group of old farts in Georgia that was busted a few days ago that were plotting violent actions against fellow citizen with guns and ricin because, as they stated, they were afraid of gun rights being taken from them. This, even though gun rights have moved more toward liberalization in the last few years. They belief the NRAs propaganda.

[hack89]

8. What specific acts of violence can you pin on the NRA?

show me where they have specifically advocated violence?

I belong to the NRA - I am not a violent right winger.

[safeinOhio]

10. see video above

Ted Nugent, member of the board of directors and spokesperson for the NRA.

If he does not represent or speak for the NRA, why don't they disown him and kick him out?

[hack89]

11. So there are no actual acts of violence you can point at?

just the ramblings of a drug addled man? Is telling Obama or Hillary to "suck my machine gun" an act of violence? By that standard DU is a very violent place.

[rrneck]

19. That kind of rabble rousing is dangerous.

And its dangerous because the NRA won't be directly responsible for violence. When religious groups incite followers like that abortion doctors get shot.

As a member of the board of a very powerful lobbyist organization fuckhead needs to show some decorum. But he's not there to write white papers. He's there to make them and himself money.

[safeinOhio]

20. +1

[hack89]

21. So no one has actually been hurt? Got it.

since gun violence is on a steady decline have you ever considered that your concerns are overblown? I mean, did the NRA just become a "violent" organization or have they been doing this for a long time? If the latter, surely you have actually incidents to point to?

[rrneck]

24. The NRA is not a violent organization.

The NRA is an organization designed to make money and distribute risk.

They make money by telling people what they want to hear. Who is fuckhead talking to in that clip?

The NRA has become one of the most powerful lobbyist groups in the country because Democrats handed the gun issue to them on a silver platter and now they're just doing disaster capitalism like all the rest. That silly bullshit doesn't mean much now but if you haven't noticed the political left has finally found its way to the streets. Thanks to authoritarian demagoguery from douchebags like whatshisname the chances of violent conflict are increased.

The problem is that the best way to influence government isn't through the voting booth but through the bank and just because the NRA has led the fight against bad gun legislation is no reason to get all dewey eyed over them. They're just another corporation profiting off a dysfunctional system.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

23. never mind.

[beevul]

14. So why do so in this thread, rather than its own unique thread...

"I just want to expose the NRA for what it is, a violent right wing, dangerous organization that promotes violence against those that disagree with their agenda."

So why do so in this thread, rather than its own unique thread where THAT IS the topic and could be 100% the focus, rather than in this thread where its a tangent, and therefore less effective to your stated goal of wanting "to expose the NRA for what it is"?

Of course, you're free to post however you like.

But we are also free to ask why here and not in its own OP.

So why then, not post that as its own OP and instead post it here - hamstringing your own stated goal by doing so?


I think you're simply trying to distract from the issue at hand, personally.


"a low level bureaucrat that no one has ever heard of."

Snork. Yeah, hes only the assistant attourney general of the united States.


Yep. You're trying to distract, with some added spin.

[safeinOhio]

16. In response to post.

"Many here will object to the use of NRA-ILA as a news source."
NRA in the subject of post. If I see a post about an issue, I will compare and contrast with an opposing view.

[beevul]

In other words...

In other words, yes, you're trying to distract.

[beevul]

44. nt

nt

[beevul]

45. NT

nt

[iverglas]

34. hey, this thread has to serve some purpose

There's already a thread about the material quoted in the opening post.

[RSillsbee]

39. So, in a word, yes

You do want to ban semi automatic weapons

[Callisto32]

13. You mean...

the same kind of guns that the prez and congress (liberal or not, doesn't matter, they all seem to love spending money and time on shit that goes boom) vote to buy for themselves, but at the same time would not like the "lesser" of us to have?

[spin]

27. The military uses true assault rifles which are fully auto or burst fire ...

Assault rifle
An assault rifle is a selective fire (selectable between semi-auto and fully automatic) rifle (capable of being fired from the shoulder) that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.<1><2><3><4> Assault rifles are the standard infantry weapons in most modern armies. Assault rifles are categorized in between light machine guns, which are intended more for sustained automatic fire in a light support role, and submachine guns, which fire a pistol cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge....emphasis added

***snip***

Assault rifles vs. "Assault weapons"

The term assault weapon is a United States political and legal term used to describe a variety of semi-automatic firearms that have certain features generally associated with military assault rifles. The 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired on September 13, 2004, codified the definition of an assault weapon. It defined the rifle type of assault weapon as a semiautomatic firearm with the ability to accept a detachable magazine containing more than 10 rounds, and two or more of the following:

Folding or telescoping stock
Primary pistol grip
Forward grip
Threaded barrel (for a muzzle brake or a suppressor, commonly called a silencer)
Barrel shroud

The assault weapons ban did not restrict weapons capable of fully automatic fire, such as assault rifles and machine guns, which have been continuously and heavily regulated since the National Firearms Act of 1934 was passed. Subsequent laws such as the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 also affected the importation and civilian ownership of fully automatic firearms, the latter fully prohibiting sales of newly manufactured machine guns to non-law enforcement or SOT (special occupational taxpayer) dealers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle

A very interesting and informative video about this topic which was made by a police officer can be viewed at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysf8x477c30

The facts are the facts. I don't pay much attention to fools like Ted Nuggent or for that matter Lanny Breuer who was deeply involved in the "Fast and Furious" scandal and may become the fall guy in the scandal.

Lanny Breuer: Should have learned from past 'gun-walking' failure
By TIM MAK | 10/31/11 9:40 PM EDT Updated: 11/1/11 7:41 AM EDT

A senior Justice Department official was aware last year that controversial “gun-walking” tactics were used in a gun-trafficking operation carried out five years ago during the Bush administration, but did not take aggressive steps to ensure that such techniques were not repeated in other federal investigations.

***snip***

“Knowing what I now know was a pattern of unacceptable and misguided tactics used by the ATF, I regret that I did not alert others within the leadership of the Department of Justice to the tactics used in Operation Wide Receiver when they first came to my attention” in April 2010, said Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, who heads the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, in a statement released to POLITICO Monday evening.

Even as the scandal unfolded after the Dec. 2010 death of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in an incident linked to “Fast and Furious” weapons, Breuer conceded that he did not alert Justice Department leadership about his knowledge of the similar gun-walking tactics used in the earlier “Wide Receiver” operation.

“I did not draw a connection between the unacceptable tactics used by the ATF years earlier in Operation Wide Receiver and the allegations made about Operation Fast and Furious, and therefore did not, at that time, alert others within department leadership of any similarities between the two. That was a mistake, and I regret not having done so,” said Breuer.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/67303.html

[SteveM]

28. What's the diff. between a Remington 742 and an AK-47?

You are aware that most gun writers have predicted that the semi-auto "clones" of military assault rifles are rapidly becoming the weapon of choice in the field? Many have been re-chambered for deer-hunting calibers. Try one out; you'd be surprised at the ergonomics, lack of recoil, and accuracy.

[oneshooter]

29. Spin, Steve, He knows all of that but he is a Fudd and thinks that we

should be limited to bolt guns and single shots. Him and Hoyt have a lot in common, especially the hypocrisy.

[ileus]

37. 742's fire real high powered centerfire rounds? :)

and shoot pretty good groups...

[TheCowsCameHome]

5. So what if Breuer did say it?

They're a'comin' to git yer guns, and everyone here knows it.

[ileus]

7. I can see a lot of Christmas gifts because of this statement...

[SteveM]

30. Actually, there are a couple of possibilities, Cows:

Since Breuer and Feinstein both shared their anti-gun message on the same day, and that would in itself suggest that "Gun Walker, et al" was a means to "git yer guns" in at least 4-5 states on the Mexican border, to wit: the regulation of gun shops here, but not elsewhere (for the time being). Of course, this would entail non-legislative Justice Department orders based on the self-fulfilling prophecy of guns "flooding" into Mexico.

But I am struck by his statement posted in this thread:

“I did not draw a connection between the unacceptable tactics used by the ATF years earlier in Operation Wide Receiver and the allegations made about Operation Fast and Furious, and therefore did not, at that time, alert others within department leadership of any similarities between the two. That was a mistake, and I regret not having done so,” said Breuer.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x476751

Breuer seems to suggest that there was another purpose -- unacceptable to him -- with 'Wide Receiver, but not with Fast & Furious. What do you think the purpose was with Wide Receiver? Could it be to arm certain drug cartels (La Sinaloa) at the expense of the more power Zetas, when all Fast & Furious was about was a jerry-built scheme to "git yer guns" in border states, thus providing a good start at more gun control in the rest of the country. Of course Breuer may just be saying Wide Receiver was "unacceptable," when in fact there was a seam-less operation going on, up to and including Fast & Furious.

It strikes me that Breuer, Feinstein (the concealed-carry Senator from Cali) were both going into damage control by floating a typical gun-control argument as the best way to hide a more important purpose in this multi-agency operation.

[hack89]

9. Did the NRA pay him to say that? nt

[ProgressiveProfessor]

15. The NRA does not make money off of gun sales

That said, are you suggesting yet another scandal in the Obama AG office?

[hack89]

18. No - too lazy to use the sarcasm smiley

comments like his are sweet music to the ears of the NRA.

[Hoyt]

12. Breuer is right. you better run out & get another one. You can't have too many of the dang things.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hoyt]

26. Don't have that many, but do have a few revolvers. Don't take in public though. Can you say same?

If I'm not mistaken, you have a bunch of the guns Breuer is talking about. And, "oneshooter" indicates where your focus lies.

[oneshooter]

31. "I am but oneshooter out of many"

So when are you going to stop the hypocrisy and get rid of them.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[ProgressiveProfessor]

32. I already have a nice selection, but the prices have dropped some for those needing to flush out

their collections.

[iverglas]

35. hahahahaha

the prices have dropped some for those needing to flush out their collections.



Have at it!

Ah, the joys of academe.

[Hoopla Phil]

38. I'm still sitting on 3 unused AR receivers from the last slow down in sales.

I originally bought 5 of them. IIRC they were only $25.00 each. Anyhow, I'm thinking about building a nice 300BLK with one or two of them. I was thinking about a nice set-up for 3-gun and another for hunting.

[oneshooter]

40. I just sold 3 last month, only have 6 more. Thinking about building

one as a lower for a 300 Whisper. With a heavy barrel and a can it should be a righteous hog killer. Gonna hold on to the others, who knows?

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[rl6214]

54. I've got two but I certainly didn't pay $25, I paid $75

[oneshooter]

59. Paid $55 ea, about 3 years ago. n/t

[ileus]

36. I agree you can't have too many...

[S_B_Jackson]

41. How many is "too many"

of the dang things", Hoyt?

And do I really want to step-down from a true "high power" Remington 700 deer rifle to a moderate-power semi-automatic AR-derivative or AK-derivative design? Granted, there is the benefit that it offends Diane Feinstein's selectively-delicate sensibilities, but then I find her penchant for immediately crooking her finger around the trigger of a .50 BMG rifle while indiscriminately sweeping the muzzle of said rifle at the audience of one of her photo-ops fairly offensive too.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

22. U.S. Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer can kiss my ass.

[iverglas]

33. is this forum your private blog?

The quotation in the opening post of the thread dated Nov 1 to which post #1 in this thread links is identical to your opening post.

I know of someone else around here who gets excoriated for starting threads about events that have already been discussed.

Gosh, one might almost think that the objections in that case are not sincere, because if they were, the same posters would be all over this thread like ugly on that ape.

The only reason I can think of for this behaviour is that some poor innocents will wander in from Latest or some such, and all the Guns forum stalwarts can act as if nobody has ever had anything to say about this before.


Many here will object to the use of NRA-ILA as a news source. If so then prove that Mr. Breuer didn't say what he is reported to have said.

How about you stuff your straw people and their phoney demands up the barrel of one of your guns?

[Remmah2]

42. Screw the NRA rag.

It was already reported by several news sources prior. NRA is a cut and paste news source.

[iverglas]

46. yeah, that's pretty much what I said

For the record, I should correct an error in the last line of my post.

replying to: Many here will object to the use of NRA-ILA as a news source. If so then prove that Mr. Breuer didn't say what he is reported to have said.

my post should have read: How about you stuff your straw people and YOUR (not "their") phoney demands up the barrel of one of your guns?


I'm still curious why anybody would be reading the NRA-ILA website for their news, and why anyone would choose that source to cite here rather than a straightforward news source (or even the transcript at the actual source), but there ya go. Nothing to do witn the NRA-ILA, everything to do with the person citing it.

[GreenStormCloud]

47. Easy answer. NRA-ILA does a good job of keeping up with legislative gun news.

Otherwise I would have to search over the web to find out what is happening in the various states and cities with respect to gun laws. Instead I just check my email once daily in the evenings. Usually I do find an alternate source for a news item, but this time I didn't find one on a fast search. I didn't want to take the time to do a deeper search as I have found the NRA-ILA to be accurate when reporting on legislation enacted by states.

I have been a member of the NRA since 1980.

[iverglas]

48. congratulations!

I have been a member of the NRA since 1980.

Do you contribute to the political victory fund?


What you said was:

Many here will object to the use of NRA-ILA as a news source.
If so then prove that Mr. Breuer didn't say what he is reported to have said.

(a) It is absolutely appropriate to object to the use of the NRA-ILA as a news source at this site. It is a right-wing organization that spends its money overwhelmingly to defeat Democratic candidates for office. It is entirely to be expected that its "news" will contain an anti-Democratic slant, in any one of the numerous ways that news reports can slant the truth.

(b) Nobody who objects to the source is under any obligation to comply with your demand to do anything. Objecting to the source does not mean denying the content.


FYI, jmg... recently posted this link to the testimony:

http://www.c-span.org/Events/New-Intl-Crime-Strategy-Outlined-in-Hearing/10737425150-1/

[GreenStormCloud]

49. NRA is not right-wing. They take no stance on anything except gun related issues.

They are a single issue organization devoted to greater freedom for law-abiding citizens to keep and bear guns. Tough luck if you consider that one issue to be RW. The NRA-PVF has previously endorsed and given money to Democrats. They will endorse any candidate that supports their objectives.

[iverglas]

50. NRA-ILA, the organization in issue, is right-wing

It exists for the sole purpose of having right-wing individuals elected and right-wing governments installed.

They will endorse any candidate where doing so does not run counter to that objective.

Keep protesting. Too much.


Oh, I missed your answer, I think.

Do you contribute / have you contributed to the NRA-ILA's Political Victory Fund?

[GreenStormCloud]

51. Their objective is defense of RKBA freedoms and nothing else.

You do appear to be strongly opposed to RKBA so perhaps you consider gun ownership, possession, bearing, and use in self-defense to be RW.

[rl6214]

56. She's conadian so of course she is strongly opposed to RKBA

and yes, she does consider gun ownership, possession, bearing and use in self-defense to be RW.

[burf]

53. In the 2010 election NRA

endorsement did include a number of Democrats. In a CNN story:

The gun-rights group has endorsed over 200 Republican candidates for Congress, but it has also endorsed 64 Democrats – including a number of incumbents who Republicans believe may be vulnerable, like Chet Edwards in Texas, Stephanie Herseth Sandlin in South Dakota, and Tom Perriello in Virginia.


Their rational is:

A spokesman for the NRA explained that the organization uses only the issue of gun-owners rights to endorse candidates, regardless of party. And if two opposing candidates earn the same rating, the association generally favors the incumbent.

Link http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/08/nra-endorses-candidates-on-both-sides-frustrating-gop/

So has the party disowned the 64 members who took the NRA cash and endorsement?

[rl6214]

55. You know not what the fuck you speak of

The NRA-IL exists for the purpose of having pro gun rights individuals elected and pro gun rights governments installed. They will endorse any candidate where doing so does not run counter to that objective, or do you have some secret insight into why they have endorsed Democrats running for office, like Howard Dean.

[Euromutt]

58. If I may correct you there

Rating, endorsing and supporting candidates is actually the activity of the NRA's Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF). The job of the Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) is to lobby politicians in office to propose and support pro-RKBA legislation, and (generally) to oppose increased gun control measures.

Of course, the two branches do work hand in hand, in that the ILA can threaten legislators that failing to support proposed legislation will count against them when the PVF draws up its ratings, but still.

[dairydog91]

52. People "need" very little except water, food, and a little room to move.

Imagine what the national death rate would be if everyone was in 24/7 individual lockdown in automated supermax facilities! No rapes, no murders, no robberies, nothing except the nuisance of listening to the faint sounds of other people sobbing in their cells.

Or maybe we don't need to get that extreme. People could be free to roam around, but they don't really "need" sex drives, not with test-tube reproduction and the like. Just think of all the heartbreak we could prevent by "fixing" people like dogs, not to mention the innumerable wars that wouldn't occur because world leaders wouldn't be feeling insecure over the size of their genitals.

[aikoaiko]

57. trial balloon goes pop.

[GreenStormCloud]

60. Picture is upside-down. N/T

[aikoaiko]

61. Are you sure?

When balloons pop there is this temporary cloud that is captures on video. I don't know what forms the cloud -- water vapor, dust, etc.


Here are some other examples: http://www.bmumford.com/photo/highspeed/balloons.html

edited add: actually I've discovered that some photographers purposefully put dust in the balloons to produce that effect.

[GreenStormCloud]

62. Looks like the ballon is filled with water.

That's why I said it was upside-down.