Senator Dianne Feinstein (D – CA) does. “Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe.” – Associated Press, 18 November, 1993. “If I could have gotten 51 v**es in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them; “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in,” I would have done it.” – 60 Minutes on CBS, 5 February, 1995. …“The National Guard fulfills the m*****a mentioned in the Second amendment. Citizens no longer need to protect the states or themselves.”

"Civilians" are expected to turn over all their guns and let law enforcement protect them?? We had an example of that "protection" in Fla...law enforcement (with guns) waited outside while the nutcase k**led 17 people! There are some "civilians" (with guns) that would have at least entered the building and tried to stop the shooting. When your life is in danger and "seconds" count, law enforcement is only "minutes" away!

Why do conservatives think liberals want to ban all firearms?

Because they can think for themselves and do research?

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D – CA) does. “Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe.” – Associated Press, 18 November, 1993. “If I could have gotten 51 v**es in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them; “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in,” I would have done it.” – 60 Minutes on CBS, 5 February, 1995. …“The National Guard fulfills the m*****a mentioned in the Second amendment. Citizens no longer need to protect the states or themselves.”

Senator Frank Launtenberg (D – NJ) did. “We have other legislation that all of you are aware that I have been so active on, with my colleagues here, and that is to shut down the gun shows.”

“I will get the NRA shut down for good if I become president. If we can ban handguns we will do it.”-Hillary Clinton interview with Des Moines Register Aug. 8th, 2015

Fmr. Senator Howard Metzenbaum (D – OH) did. “No, we’re not looking at how to control criminals … we’re talking about banning the AK-47 and semi-automatic guns.” – Constitution Subcommittee, 2 February, 1989

Vice President Joe “Buckshot” Biden (D – DE) does. “Banning guns is an idea whose time has come.” – Associated Press, 11 November, 1993 Representative Jan Schakowski (D – IL) does. “I believe…..this is my final word……I believe that I’m supporting the Constitution of the United States which does not give the right for any individual to own a handgun….” – Recorded 25 June, 2000 by Matt Beauchamp

Fmr. Representative Major Owens (D – NY) did. “We have to start with a ban on the manufacturing and import of handguns. From there we register the guns which are currently owned, and follow that with additional bans and acquisitions of handguns and rifles with no sporting purpose.”

Representative Bobby Rush (D – IL) does. “My staff and I right now are working on a comprehensive gun-control bill. We don’t have all the details, but for instance, regulating the sale and purchase of bullets. Ultimately, I would like to see the manufacture and possession of handguns banned except for military and police use. But that’s the endgame. And in the meantime, there are some specific things that we can do with legislation.”

Vermont State Mary Ann Carlson (D) does. “We must be able to arrest people before they commit crimes. By registering guns and knowing who has them we can do that. If they have guns they are pretty likely to commit a crime.”

New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) does. ” …confiscation could be an option…” Sarah Brady, fmr. Chairman of Handgun Control Inc. (now The Brady Campaign) does. “…I don’t believe gun owners have rights.” – Hearst Newspapers, October 1997 “The House passage of our bill is a victory for this country! Common sense wins out. I’m just so thrilled and excited. The sale of guns must stop. Halfway measures are not enough.” – 1 July, 1988…

“Our main agenda is to have all guns banned. We must use wh**ever means possible. It doesn’t matter if you have to distort the facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed.” – The National Educator, January 1994, pg. 3, to Fmr. Senator Howard Metzenbaum

Fmr. Chancellor of Boston University John Silber did. “I don’t believe anybody has a right to own any kind of a firearm. I believe in order to obtain a permit to own a firearm, that person should undergo an exhaustive criminal background check. In addition, an applicant should give up his right to privacy and submit his medical records for review to see if the person has ever had a problem with alcohol, drugs or mental illness . . . The Constitution doesn’t count!”

Fmr. United States Attorney General Janet “Waco” Reno does. “The most effective means of fighting crime in the United States is to outlaw the possession of any type of firearm by the civilian populace.”-- Written affidavit by Fred Diamond, 1984 B’nai B’rith meeting in Coral Gables, Florida

Deborah Prothrow-Stith, of the Office of Government and Community Programs and the Community Violence Prevention Project at the Harvard School of Public Health, does. “My own view on gun control is simple: I h**e guns and I cannot imagine why anybody would want to own one. If I had my way, guns for sport would be registered, and all other guns would be banned.” The ACLU does. “We urge passage of federal legislation … to prohibit … the private ownership and possession of handguns.” ACLU #47.

“I now think the only way to control handgun use is to prohibit the guns. And the only way to do that is to change the Constitution. — M. Gartner, then President of NBC News, USA Today, January 16, 1992, pg. A9.

Now read the Democrat H.R.4269 - Assault Weapons Ban of 2015 pay particular attention to the SINGLE-SHOTS and BOLT ACTIONS "Assault Weapons"!


Why do liberals think conservatives are angered by this?

Because every single liberal argument twisting the 2nd amendment that is does not mean that every citizen has the rights to own and carry arms, uninfringed.
And because historical evidence by hundreds of our founding fathers speeches and quotes, give empirical evidence to irrefutable facts they wanted every citizen armed.

Because every single argument liberals have for banning guns for a safer America is factually false and can be backed by empirical evidence.

In looking at the history of this question going back well before the 1994 AWB, and well before mass shootings with 'assault style weapons was all the rage, there can be no question in the mind of any rational person with even a modicum of intuitive sensibility that the L*****t objective has been and still is to disarm America for reasons far from preservation of health, safety and welfare of the citizenry. Their arguments have, however always hit a brick wall and will continue to do so; because they simply don't understand the American psyche and more to the point, they consistently ignore what we the people say.

There are countless polls and surveys spanning many, many years that clearly indicate that the majority of Americans not only understand that guns are not the issue, that banning guns will not remove the crime, that guns make them feel safer in their homes, that the second amendment is sacrosanct ... to the degree that even today in polls as recent as October 2017 by major polling organizations; most Americans feel there is nothing wrong with tighter gun laws BUT fully 72% are adamantly opposed to any modification to much less abolishing of the second amendment. But as history has proven a determined L*****t will ignore the people all of the time and it is no different today.

Interestingly, on the issue of law enforcement taking up the slack when the population is disarmed; it's a matter of record that thousands of police agencies have been vocal about the homeowner being their own first line of defense. Even if, in the best case law enforcement is only 5 minutes away, anyone who has been under fire will tell you that 5 minutes is two lifetimes; that in 5 minutes many people can die with any run of the mill gun, never mind assault gun ... and never mind 5 minutes away ... as you point out in the most recent Florida incident law enforcement where THERE, already on scene.

I believe today we are in no greater danger of losing our second amendment rights than at any other time. Why? Apart from the certainty of civil upheaval, there are too many politicians including Progressive L*****t America Hating Democrats who don't want to lose their lifetime annuity and too many who aspire to join that elite club ... those who out of a sense of self preservation if nothing else do take the time to listen to the people and know to leave it alone.

There's a pro and con second amendment debate,when you have as such the competive parties have a tendency to quote the extreme,and exaggerate the down sides of their opponents stance so as to make their arguments more compelling ,also some of them do believe in a total absence of individual gun owner ship,and do to the argument that the constitution does not directly address the issue of individual gun ownership,comma ambiguity not with standing,they are right.The pro second amendment people are going under an assumption,and using their common sense,the second amendment only directly speaks of bearing/bareing arms meaning an army/m*****as.The comma only signifies a pause so as to keep the phrase from being what they call in grammatics run on.To further explain- The right to bear arms a m*****a,when written like this with out the comma,the phrase becomes one object- BEAR ARMS A M*****A -run on phrase,to further elaborate,an example. I went to the store and I bought a loaf of bread hamburger jelly soda soap,one would discern that I bought A`breadhamburgerjellysodasoap,one item,however in fact l purchased five seperate Items,I went to the store and I bought a loaf of bread,hambuger,jelly,soda,and soap.the comma is used to pause, to indicate seperation of clauses and phrase,independent or dependent,and to distinguish different items from one another.