General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMarine To Sen. Feinstein – ‘Some Woman’ Will Not Limit My Assault Weapons
Marine To Sen. Feinstein Some Woman Will Not Limit My Assault Weapons
2013/01/05 - http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/01/05/marine-to-sen-feinstein-some-woman-will-not-limit-my-assault-weapons/
By Lorraine Devon Wilke
The letter in its entirety, without corrections, is as follows:
Senator Dianne Feinstein,
I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the governments right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You maam have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.
I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America. I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.
I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.
We, the people, deserve better than you.
Respectfully Submitted, Joshua Boston Cpl, United States Marine Corps 2004-2012
MjolnirTime
(1,800 posts)Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)You better be a good boy! One felony and then they can tell you "You'll have nothing and like it!"
SugarShack
(1,635 posts)Just as easily, a male senator could be trying to remove assault weapons from a female service member.
That's why I call him "sexist".
SharonAnn
(13,767 posts)who he's outraged with is the tipoff.
In Newtown, CT, the mother was apparently going to take action to have guardanship of her son so he "showed her".
This seems to be a strong current in these killings, an outrage against women or a woman.
I told my friend when we first heard about the Newtown, CT shooting "I'll bet he's angry with some woman who laid the law down to him."
Turns out I may have been right.
TheCowsCameHome
(40,163 posts)I couldn't care less about what you were or who you are.
Seek help before you go over the edge completel.y
Siwsan
(26,177 posts)Serious question, going by his signature - is that a typical rate of advancement? Especially during a time of conflict?? I am a cold-war Navy veteran and the rate of advancement was much faster than that.
I just get the feeling there's a lot of story in this guy.
rateyes
(17,438 posts)Marengo
(3,477 posts)When I served, it wasn't unheard of depending on the MOS. In my MOS field, 2500, there were a multitude of what were known as "contract corporals", or Marines who signed into the 2500 field for a guarantee of E-4 within a certain period of time in service (I don't remember what that time period was). Owing to the glut of contract E-4's, it was very difficult for the rest of us to acheive even E-4 in the first enlistment. Most did in the second, but it could be a couple more years depending on the "cutting score".
In other MOS fields, such as infantry, the promo rate was much faster due in part to much higher attrition.
It is my understanding that promo rates are traditionally accelerated in war-time, but I could very well be wrong.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)branch of the armed forces, so promotions, on average, would be slower then in the Army, Navy or Air Force.
It can also vary by unit, since a unit is only authorized a certain number of individuals in a given rank
jmowreader
(50,453 posts)8 years is "high year of tenure" for Marine corporals - if they don't get promoted to sergeant by then, they go home.
During the Cold War, it was much easier to get promoted in any branch than it is now - now, they're trying to get rid of people and HYT (retention control points in the Army) are the easiest way to do it...they hit RCP, they go home, no sitting around trying to make up atrocities about reasonably decent people.
crim son
(27,462 posts)rateyes
(17,438 posts)Fuck off.
Sincerely,
One of the people for whom you work, asshole.
Mrs. Overall
(6,839 posts)MrScorpio
(73,626 posts)Only, soon, you'll be reaching for it while you're out of the Corps.
Undismayed
(76 posts)Diane Feinstein is an unabashed hypocrite. She perpetuates the guns for the rich ,but not the poor meme.
Mrs. Overall
(6,839 posts)derby378
(30,252 posts)Good luck with that. I don't care much for the "some woman" remark, but the rest is certainly worth considering.
And since "assault rifles" are by convention fully automatic, what sort of weapons are you referring to?
Mrs. Overall
(6,839 posts)Response to derby378 (Reply #17)
Post removed
derby378
(30,252 posts)Undismayed
(76 posts)Mrs. Overall
(6,839 posts)billh58
(6,635 posts)a Gungeon supporter, and one who has claimed that the 2nd Amendment allows for an armed insurrection against the government of the United States of America.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2124742
Mrs. Overall
(6,839 posts)that are traditionally Democratic.
I can't believe DU tolerates some of the awful crap I just read in that forum. Really nasty anti-government, anti-Biden, etc... posts. Wow. We are very tolerant.
billh58
(6,635 posts)and the Gungeon is basically a right-wing, neoconservative enclave on DU. Since the Admins have recently allowed the discussion of guns in GD, the Gungeoneers have brought in recruits from other right-wing sites who have been heavily trolling DU. MIRT has been removing them in droves, but they keep coming back.
I guess you could say that we are tolerant, but it certainly stinks up the place...
Darth_Kitten
(14,192 posts)n/t
Undismayed
(76 posts)I said that I don't appreciate the misogyny, but hold a similar view regarding guns.
spanone
(135,636 posts)Cleita
(75,480 posts)of misogynist opinions. I hope he enjoys his solitude.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)Break the law, suffer the consequences.
If it comes to it, registering ownership of a semi-automatic weapon is easier than having to serve prison time for refusing to do so, becoming a convicted felon, then losing your right to own a firearm.
But, stupid people usually make poor decisions.
derby378
(30,252 posts)...if Feinstein's bill becomes law, that Marine's weapon is confiscated. Immediately. Then it gets registered. And then this Marine has to go through the entire process to get a permit (actually, an NFA Class 3 tax stamp) that would allow him to repurchase the gun in question.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)I'd put it at 0%.
There will be no confiscation or retro-active banning.
Registration is about it, and some transfer rights regulated under the auspices of an expanded NFA.
At best, that's what will come out of all this.
derby378
(30,252 posts)Semi-automatic firearms have been in civilian hands in America for over 200 years, and it's far too late for Sen. Feinstein to start trying to restrict them now.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)I think you were meaning 1776, but we'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say 1813.
Once you do, you should probably go edit this Wikipedia page, since they point out the first semi-automatic weapon was invented in 1885. In Germany. Meaning it would be very unlikely to be found in the US at that time.
derby378
(30,252 posts)...until I learned about the Girandoni rifle that Lewis and Clark carried into the wilderness. Semi-automatic with a 20-round magazine. Wikipedia is indeed your friend.
First, it was an air rifle, not a firearm.
Second:
That's as semi-auto as a lever-action rifle. Which isn't semi-auto.
derby378
(30,252 posts)The air reservoir generated enough pressure to bring down game. This wasn't some ol' pellet gun. And with a 20-round mag, too.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Again, it had to be waved in the air to reload it. It did not "chamber" a new round after firing.
That means it's not semi-auto. Just like bolt-action or lever-action rifles are not semi-auto. Just like single-action revolvers aren't semi-auto.
So what semi-auto is 200 years old?
derby378
(30,252 posts)They were labelled "assault weapons" by state legislators, too.
Nice try.
Takket
(21,425 posts)"I am the person whom you serve."
No, sir, she does not serve YOU. She serves the PEOPLE. She serves the common good of the public.
gulliver
(13,142 posts)Robb
(39,665 posts)madrchsod
(58,162 posts)NashvilleLefty
(811 posts)I thought she just had a CCW. In which the "hypocrite" label is pure nonsense.
Undismayed
(76 posts)Yes, she thinks she's so special that she gets to carry and no one else does.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)while you still can
Undismayed
(76 posts)She admits that she obtained a ccw and a handgun on video. Not only that ,but she got it in California where an average citizen has no hope of getting one.
Kaleva
(36,147 posts)The Marine who wrote the letter is arguing against having his AR-15 registered and says he won't do that if it becomes the law.
At the time Senator Feinstein got her CCW back in the 1970s, she was a target of the New World Liberation Front. She got rid of her permit once that organization was no longer a threat to her.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/273989-feinstein-doesnt-have-concealed-carry-permit-anymore
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)JI7
(89,182 posts)TheCowsCameHome
(40,163 posts)Grow up, sonny.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)minor laws. And anyone who has been in for eight years knows that quite well.
I would not be surprised if this corporal has already been made to stand at attention while a major or higher ranking officer has reminded him of his obligation to obey all laws and that officer made sure the corporal said "yes sir" or "yes ma'am" before being dismissed.
undeterred
(34,658 posts)Darth_Kitten
(14,192 posts)I'm sure they are used to it.
Grow up, honey.
Oldenuff
(582 posts)Like it or not,I think he is right on.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Mrs. Overall
(6,839 posts)you would refuse to register your weapon or give up a automatic/assault (whatever the hell it is) weapon? And you would advise other Americans to also refuse to follow any new legislation?
Wow, you people really love your guns or else you are really scared.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)People who own guns see it as a Constitutionally-protected right. If gun bans are passed, lots of people will see it as the government attempting to trample the Bill of Rights.
Mrs. Overall
(6,839 posts)are gun advocates just using that as an excuse. I guess I'm asking what's truly "legal"--the law or the protected right.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)A law is not illegal by definition. A law can be declared unconstitutional by a court.
If you are in high school yet, you should have learned this by now.
Oldenuff
(582 posts)Just because I don't toe the party line and can think for myself,I am one of "those people"?
I am grateful that I can think independently,and wish that more people would/could.Rights are rights.You can spin the issue up to make it look like something else,but it is still a right.
Do you suppose there are many Republicans who believe what they believe because they have been deceived and won't think an issue thru and make their own determination based on fact?If you believe that Republicans can be lead astray,why wouldn't you believe it could also happen to Dems?
The effort to separate people from their guns has to start sometime,and I believe that time has begun.An unarmed populace is far easier to control.
To answer the question: you would refuse to register your weapon or give up a automatic/assault (whatever the hell it is) weapon? And you would advise other Americans to also refuse to follow any new legislation?
If we had been a law abiding people,we would still be one of the Colonies.Just because someone passes a law restricting a right,does not mean people will obey it.Some people will always stand up.
Raine
(30,540 posts)his mother when she told him to pick up his toys, probably mother had to have father tell him. His attitude toward women is disgusting if he was my son I would be so ashamed.
Skittles
(152,965 posts)that guy should be NOWHERE NEAR weapons
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Nothing like my Marine buddy who can't stand guns and respects Democrats.
NoGOPZone
(2,971 posts)derby378
(30,252 posts)The link is gone, but some enterprising DUers managed a screen grab:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022144873
Response to Coyotl (Original post)
Cali_Democrat This message was self-deleted by its author.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)in preventing the abuse of guns.
On November 27, 1978, San Francisco mayor George Moscone and supervisor Harvey Milk were assassinated by a rival politician, Dan White, who had resigned from the Board of Supervisors only two weeks prior. Feinstein was close by in City Hall at the time of the shootings, and discovered Milk's body after hearing the gunshots and going to investigate. Later that day at a press conference originally organized by Moscone to announce White's successor, Feinstein announced the assassinations to the stunned public, stating: "As president of the board of supervisors, it's my duty to make this announcement. Both Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk have been shot and killed."[15]
Feinstein appears in archival footage and is credited in the Academy Award-winning documentary film The Times of Harvey Milk (1984). She appears again briefly in archival footage, announcing the death of Moscone and Milk in the 2008 film Milk. Feinstein and her position as President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors are also alluded to several times in the movie, and a portrayal of her character has a few off-screen lines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dianne_Feinstein#Mayor_of_San_Francisco
Moscone planned to announce White's replacement days later, on November 27, 1978.[113] A half hour before the press conference, White entered City Hall through a basement window to avoid metal detectors, and made his way to Moscone's office. Witnesses heard shouting between White and Moscone, then gunshots. White shot the mayor in the shoulder and chest, then twice in the head after Moscone had fallen on the floor.[114] White then quickly walked to his former office, reloading his police-issue revolver with hollow-point bullets along the way, and intercepted Milk, asking him to step inside for a moment. Dianne Feinstein heard gunshots and called the police. She found Milk face down on the floor, shot five times, including twice in the head at close range. After identifying both bodies, Feinstein was shaking so badly she required support from the police chief.[113][note 10] It was she who announced to the press, "Today San Francisco has experienced a double tragedy of immense proportions. As President of the Board of Supervisors, it is my duty to inform you that both Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk have been shot and killed," then adding after being drowned out by shouts of disbelief, "and the suspect is Supervisor Dan White."[96][113] Milk was 48 years old. Moscone was 49.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Milk
I think Boston is way out of line.
jmowreader
(50,453 posts)Tell me this dumbass, in his nastygram to a sitting United States Senator, didn't just admit he owns an AR-15.
ellie
(6,928 posts)Paladin
(28,204 posts)The Rudester hands this guy his ass on a platter, in typically vicious, foul-mouthed fashion.
Hope you enjoyed it, Cpl. Boston. If it helps any, The Rude Pundit is a man.