PDA

View Full Version : Congresswoman Jackie Spier LIVE (not so current now)


taperxz
08-01-2012, 6:24 PM
Current town hall meeting via PHONE


" i welcome the NRA to take me on any time any day" "i will not bow to them"

"AW's in this country are responsible for the majority of gun crime in this country"

"I am opposed to hi cap mags and will take them down along with CW McCarthy"

Schlyme
08-01-2012, 6:50 PM
"AW's in this country are responsible for the majority of gun crime in this country"

Soooo...... What She's trying to say issss handguns are AW's toooo?????

:stupid:

SanPedroShooter
08-01-2012, 6:51 PM
Fists and feet baby, fists and feet....

taperxz
08-01-2012, 6:56 PM
waiting to ask a question in this town hall meeting :D

taperxz
08-01-2012, 7:06 PM
My question and had to keep it simple. I got the last question.

Why do you feel the need to create new gun laws when less than 1/2% of gun owners commit crimes? Regardless of laws passed, a criminal will not follow the law. Why infringe on a civil right?

I don't think she was happy with my question. Her response was about the shooter in Colorado and the six thousand rounds he bought and then shut down the meeting.:p

Changalang
08-01-2012, 7:26 PM
vids/recording?

taperxz
08-01-2012, 7:36 PM
vids/recording?

Sorry it was a phone call i answered because i subscribe and had to wait to ask and then get somewhat vetted. My question was limited to 10-15 seconds:confused:

She was not happy with my question if the tone of her voice was any indication:D

m03
08-01-2012, 7:37 PM
"AW's in this country are responsible for the majority of gun crime in this country"

http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o185/Shrapnel540/Forum%20Response%20Pictures/facep.jpg

How can these people make such easily-disprovable statements?

Rifles make up only 2% of the guns used in crimes, so even if all rifles used in crimes were "AWs" (hint: they aren't), she's still so far off the mark that it's sad.

mag360
08-01-2012, 10:06 PM
you did good but it would have been nice throw the rifle "aw" statistiv back in her face. as all rifles only account for 2% of crime how could banning them appreciably reduce anything" type of thing. but i still think you did good! :)

bwiese
08-02-2012, 12:20 AM
Getting into a public confrontation with Jackie Spier over guns is unwise.

She's from a 'safe' district and has a ton of sympathy for being shot up in Guyana during the People's Temple/Jim Jones disaster.

She went down there with Sen. Leo Ryan, who was killed. (She was young at the time and I believe she was Ryan's "more-than-an-aide".)

She has little relevance in Congress over guns, so let's not give her a platform here.

taperxz
08-02-2012, 5:58 AM
Getting into a public confrontation with Jackie Spier over guns is unwise.

She's from a 'safe' district and has a ton of sympathy for being shot up in Guyana during the People's Temple/Jim Jones disaster.

She went down there with Sen. Leo Ryan, who was killed. (She was young at the time and I believe she was Ryan's "more-than-an-aide".)

She has little relevance in Congress over guns, so let's not give her a platform here.

Very true Bill, however, what I posted in my OP, was her answer to her opening question. I thought a brief, simple question to even the playing field was appropriate.

I was not given a chance to respond over the phone. For those not knowing what Bweiss is talking about, google "Jonestown".

Jackie Speier, did go through hell. She has a noted bias.

Suvorov
08-02-2012, 6:42 AM
Very true Bill, however, what I posted in my OP, was her answer to her opening question. I thought a brief, simple question to even the playing field was appropriate.

I was not given a chance to respond over the phone. For those not knowing what Bweiss is talking about, google "Jonestown".

Jackie Speier, did go through hell. She has a noted bias.

For Jackie Speier to equate lawful gun owners to the people who shot her up is as bigoted as a man who equates all Hispanics with the Mexican cartels.

I will agree with Bill on the point that she has a lot of support in her district. All those rich liberals in Hillsborough and Burlingame just love her.

BlasterMaster81
08-02-2012, 6:47 AM
Jackie Speier did go thru hell at Jonestown but it makes me wonder if she ever thought about how she and her crew could have protected themselves if armed.

HK Dave
08-02-2012, 8:56 AM
Fact: Nationally, “assault weapons” were used in 1.4% of crimes involving firearms and
0.25% of all violent crime before the enactment of any national or state “assault
weapons” ban. In many major urban areas (San Antonio, Mobile, Nashville, etc.) and
some entire states (Maryland, New Jersey, etc.) the rate is less than 0.1%.5

Fact: Even weapons misclassified as “assault weapons” (common in the former Federal
and California “assault weapons” confiscations) are used in less than 1% of all
homicides.

Fact: Police reports show that “assault weapons” are a non-problem:
For California:
• Los Angeles: In 1998, of 538 documented gun incidents, only one (0.2%)
involved an “assault weapon.”
• San Francisco: In 1998, only 2.2% of confiscated weapons were “assault
weapons.”
• San Diego: Between 1988 and 1990, only 0.3% of confiscated weapons were
“assault weapons.”

Statistics pulled from the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics.

Suvorov
08-02-2012, 9:51 AM
Fact: Nationally, “assault weapons” were used in 1.4% of crimes involving firearms and
0.25% of all violent crime before the enactment of any national or state “assault
weapons” ban. In many major urban areas (San Antonio, Mobile, Nashville, etc.) and
some entire states (Maryland, New Jersey, etc.) the rate is less than 0.1%.5

Fact: Even weapons misclassified as “assault weapons” (common in the former Federal
and California “assault weapons” confiscations) are used in less than 1% of all
homicides.

Fact: Police reports show that “assault weapons” are a non-problem:
For California:
• Los Angeles: In 1998, of 538 documented gun incidents, only one (0.2%)
involved an “assault weapon.”
• San Francisco: In 1998, only 2.2% of confiscated weapons were “assault
weapons.”
• San Diego: Between 1988 and 1990, only 0.3% of confiscated weapons were
“assault weapons.”

Statistics pulled from the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics.

You think facts/the truth are any good against a statist demagogue like Jackie? :confused:

This is all good stuff, but as we see, Jackie and her types make bold face lies and the media (who is on their side) will not challenge them. Tell a lie enough times and it becomes the truth.

Gray Peterson
08-02-2012, 9:52 AM
For Jacki Spear to equate lawful gun owners to the people who shot her up is as bigoted as a man who equates all Hispanics with the Mexican cartels.

I will agree with Bill on the point that she has a lot of support in her district. All those rich liberals in Hillsborough and Burlingame just love her.

Gun ownership is a choice, ethnicity is not.

Suvorov
08-02-2012, 10:28 AM
Gun ownership is a choice, ethnicity is not.

A bigot is a bigot though for no other reason that they paint with a broad brush. I was born into the gun culture so other than effectively renouncing my family culture it is a part of who I am. There is no question that she and hers equate my culture with that of mass murderers. That is a pretty broad brush don't you think? While you may argue semantics, I see very little difference.

XD40SUBBIE
08-02-2012, 12:31 PM
Wassup with Frisco and ignorance about firearms? Is it the water?

BlasterMaster81
08-02-2012, 2:48 PM
Wassup with Frisco and ignorance about firearms? Is it the water?

There must be something in the water at City Hall.

donw
08-03-2012, 10:34 AM
Fact: Nationally, “assault weapons” were used in 1.4% of crimes involving firearms and
0.25% of all violent crime before the enactment of any national or state “assault
weapons” ban. In many major urban areas (San Antonio, Mobile, Nashville, etc.) and
some entire states (Maryland, New Jersey, etc.) the rate is less than 0.1%.5

Fact: Even weapons misclassified as “assault weapons” (common in the former Federal
and California “assault weapons” confiscations) are used in less than 1% of all
homicides.

Fact: Police reports show that “assault weapons” are a non-problem:
For California:
• Los Angeles: In 1998, of 538 documented gun incidents, only one (0.2%)
involved an “assault weapon.”
• San Francisco: In 1998, only 2.2% of confiscated weapons were “assault
weapons.”
• San Diego: Between 1988 and 1990, only 0.3% of confiscated weapons were
“assault weapons.”

Statistics pulled from the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics.

even though the source is a credible one, it is totally ignored by most, if not all, legislators...

keep in mind...facts, figures and statistics mean little to legislators. there is no room for logic in their irrational world. to them, emotion and "Feel good" is the mantra.

Changalang
08-03-2012, 1:53 PM
Sorry it was a phone call i answered because i subscribe and had to wait to ask and then get somewhat vetted. My question was limited to 10-15 seconds:confused:

She was not happy with my question if the tone of her voice was any indication:D

drat. but congrats on grinding her gears. :D

monk
08-03-2012, 2:01 PM
Fact: Nationally, “assault weapons” were used in 1.4% of crimes involving firearms and
0.25% of all violent crime before the enactment of any national or state “assault
weapons” ban. In many major urban areas (San Antonio, Mobile, Nashville, etc.) and
some entire states (Maryland, New Jersey, etc.) the rate is less than 0.1%.5

Fact: Even weapons misclassified as “assault weapons” (common in the former Federal
and California “assault weapons” confiscations) are used in less than 1% of all
homicides.

Fact: Police reports show that “assault weapons” are a non-problem:
For California:
• Los Angeles: In 1998, of 538 documented gun incidents, only one (0.2%)
involved an “assault weapon.”
• San Francisco: In 1998, only 2.2% of confiscated weapons were “assault
weapons.”
• San Diego: Between 1988 and 1990, only 0.3% of confiscated weapons were
“assault weapons.”

Statistics pulled from the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics.

Wouldn't this mean that the anti-right AW ban is "working" in CA? As are the other ridiculous and arbitrary laws currently in place.