From a SanDiego Union-Tribune Article:

[b]"I clearly don't have the votes for even a straight (extension of the ban) right now," said Feinstein, who plans to pressure colleagues with a binder showing all crimes involving assault weapons in their districts. [/b]


That's what I infer from her comment.

CRC

A one page, one line binder?  COOL!!

Well duhhhh

The shit wont even come up for a vote on the floor of the house.  

fvck her and all her cronies!

This one is a done deal!

I'll bet my own skin that Feinstein doesn't even know the difference between a preban and a postban "assault rifle"! Look, these idiots don't know anything about anything if their aides don't show them a copy containing statistics, or a briefing on the subject.
California is beautiful, but the government has made it unacceptable for gun rights advocates and law abiding gun owners to live in freedom. California will be the first state to allow whites to become a minority, as early as 2005! Get out while the getting is good!

She doesn't have the votes NOW.  The AWB doesn't sunset until Sept. 2004, that's more than 15 months away.

Two or three mass shootings plus a little Bush II slippage in the pollsand then who knows what will happen??

Write your Congresscritter today!

She DOESN'T want to know. The facts just get in the way of her rage. She quotes the VPC website, which lists the SKS as an "Assault rifle" (For those of you at home, it doesn't have a detachable mag, pistol grip, etc...)

Don't be dumb, guys.

Of COURSE she knows the differences!  

But she doesn't want to start EDUCATING the ignorant peasants (or is that pissants?) that she's hoping will write whiny soccer mom letters to their congressmen.

No, she wants them to remain ignorant, and thus useful to her cause.

It's a mistake to assume your enemy is stupid.  In this case, she's got a bad case of wrong thinking, but she's not stupid and knows the truth.  She just doesn't like it.

CJ

Damn! She still aint got laid?

In the past, when Dem challenger Kathleen Brown Rice(sister of former CA gov. Jerry Brown, aka Gov. Moonbeam) against then-gov Pete Wilson, she held up an AK during a political rally, and we need to ban these weapons of mass destruction. Of course if anyone of us did that we would probably been shot dead on the spot. Yep, those Dems don't know the diff between their @$$ and a hole in the ground.

The ban needs to die...

I need a 'proper configuration' Saiga-12 (i.e. with a pistol grip. Some larger-capacity mags would be nice too)...

Here's the poop from the whole story.
========================================================
Debate rekindled on assault-weapon ban

Law expires in '04; some say, so what

By Dana Wilkie
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE

May 27, 2003

WASHINGTON – If Congress allows the nation's decade-old assault-weapons ban to expire next year – which seems likely – then the prospect raises an important question: What would a world without an assault-weapons ban look like?

Brace yourself: It won't look much different.

That's the opinion of many experts about the 1994 ban that enraged gun supporters, elated gun-control advocates, created high drama in Congress and arguably led to the Election Day defeat of some who supported it.

Gun manufacturers have created legal weapons nearly identical to those that were outlawed, and federal studies indicate the law had little effect on crime. This has led gun-control advocates to wonder whether the ban went far enough, and gun-rights supporters to suggest that such laws do little more than boost the profiles of lawmakers such as Sen. Dianne Feinstein.

The California Democrat said she believes the ban she wrote and shepherded through Congress nearly 10 years ago has helped make America's streets safer.

"If you're a drive-by shooter, do you go out with a .38-caliber revolver?" she asked. "I don't think so. You just point (an assault weapon) out the window and pump away . . . and you're bound to hit somebody. What kind of a gun is that for civilian society?"

The assault-weapons ban outlaws the sale and possession of 19 types of firearms by name, and a host of others that have certain characteristics. It will expire Sept. 13, 2004, unless Congress passes a Feinstein bill that would make it permanent.

President Bush said he would support extending the ban, but he is not pressing for a vote from congressional conservatives, who don't want Republicans to weigh in on the politically touchy matter just before the election.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the president "is focused on the current legislative agenda" in Congress, rather than lobbying for the ban's extension.

Kristen Rand, legislative policy director for the Violence Policy Center, which supports the ban, said she believes Bush felt comfortable supporting an extension because he knew conservatives would never let it pass.

"Any candidate identified as pro-assault weapon is going to be viewed with skepticism by a big portion of the electorate, and probably most importantly suburban women" and independents who are key voters in next year's election, Rand said.

While polls show a majority of Americans support the ban, the weapons continue to be easily available. That's because gun manufacturers can produce virtually the same type of weapon and still comply with the law.

For instance, the ban outlaws semiautomatic rifles that have detachable magazines with more than 10 rounds of ammunition, and that have at least two other characteristics.

Among those are: A folding stock, which allows the gun to collapse for easier storage; a flash suppressor, which reduces the muzzle flash that can impede night-time vision; and a pistol grip, which makes it easier to steady the rifle against the shoulder.

Many manufacturers simply got rid of the banned characteristics and created nearly identical guns. Even some gun-control groups say the ban has been largely ineffective for that reason.

California's assault-weapons ban prevents the making of so-called "copy cat" firearms. Feinstein wants a similar law for the nation, but she said she cannot get it passed in the GOP-controlled Congress.

"I clearly don't have the votes for even a straight (extension of the ban) right now," said Feinstein, who plans to pressure colleagues with a binder showing all crimes involving assault weapons in their districts.

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms figures show that in 1993, 8.2 percent of guns used in crimes were assault weapons. By November 1996, that figure had fallen to 3.2 percent.

But that doesn't mean the assault-weapons ban reduced crime, gun-owners' groups said. Two studies by the Department of Justice – published in 1999 and 2001 – found no evidence that the ban had reduced the number of gunshot victims or gun incidents involving multiple victims – a chief goal for those who supported the ban.

Joe Waldron, executive director of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, said the ban is superficial but it helped Feinstein win a tough 1994 campaign against former Rep. Michael Huffington.

"This is a purely cosmetic rifle ban," Waldron said. "The features involved have no practical impact one way or the other."

Said Feinstein: "I would pass the strongest possible regulatory law I could, but I can't get it passed. The question is, do we do nothing and allow guns . . . that are designed to be military weapons . . . on our streets?"

If extending the ban would have little effect, as some experts say, why worry if it's extended?

For groups such as the National Rifle Association, it's a matter of getting rid of what it considers a useless law. Every gun-control law is a step toward what the NRA says is the ultimate goal of gun-control advocates: Preventing Americans from owning any firearms.

"The agenda is to incrementally chip away at the rights of all law-abiding Americans, regardless of whether (gun-control laws) have a substantive impact on reducing crime," said Andrew Arulanandam, an NRA spokesman.
 
Find this article at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20030527-9999_1n27ban.html

Oh god. Her bitching, whining and screaching is just getting wound up. Expect to see her on the evening news a lot in the next 15 months.

TGINFK     Thank God Im Not from Kali.   I here enough about her here in Oklahoma.

we all piss and moan about how bad Ca is but remember alot of our Federal Gun laws are based on laws Ca had way way before. ie Brady bill and the wait (now instant check in most places) and the 94 aw ban based on Californias early AW bill.

[shock]
[:X*]
[puke]
Ohhhhhhhhhhh.... please!

[rolleyes]
YOU screw here.  I ain't got the stomach.

DUDE!!![puke]

well Janet Reno lives in Florida now so.....

The writing is in very large letters on the wall.

But Kennedy is still too drunk to see it.

Mrs. Feinstein is brilliant in her political strategy! What this does is lull the pro-gun violence groups back to sleep and into a false sense that they have "won". WOO HOO!!!!

I was in San Francisco a year ago and I went to Pier 39. And if you go to the area where you can watch the sea lions (or seals) and see Alcatraz, on the wall outside the restaurant it is on, there's a plaque that says in 1978 Fineswine was there in her bikini...I REALLY wish someone would come up with that pic! The REAL one..Not paintshop'd..

I took a pic of the plaque but I don't have a scanner. I'll have to send it to a friend who does...I wonder if she blended in with the sea lions and nobody really saw her..hmmmm

Silly little woman.

That the favorite trick of Pravda West(aka L.A.Times), they would snivel and whine how difficult a certain gun law is to pass, and the odds of it passing are slim to none etc... Then voilá, the next morning bang! new restrictive gun law.

A binder full of crimes, eh?

You mean she's admiting the law didn't work to stop crime?

Oops! Sorry! That's just my logic talking again. I HATE it when it does that...