Senator On Guns: ‘Confiscate, Confiscate, Confiscate!’


It’s always nice when gun grabbers out their agenda in ways that belie their intentions.

Audio from a Senate hearing on gun control last week outed three State Senators who lingered after talks were finished, with each sharing a slice of elitist thought that has little to do with upholding Constitutional oaths, but lots to do with expanding the state’s control over individual freedoms and widening the cultural gap between citizens and the elected class.

From the May 9 meeting of the Senate Budget and Appropriation Committee, three or four women can be heard discussing a renewed strategy for gun control, following the defeat of the Manchin-Toomey Act in the Senate last month.

The audio quality is spotty, but the tone of the conversation — as well as the unambiguous nature of that portion of the talk that was clearly captured — reveals a smug and condescending take on just what the 2nd Amendment really means to the Americans it was conceived to protect.

“We needed a bill that is going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate,” the first woman, whose identity still isn’t known, appears to say.

“They want to keep the guns out of the hands of the bad guys, but they don’t have any regulations to do it,” responds State Senator Loretta Weinberg (D-N.J.).

“They don’t care about the bad guys. All they want to do is to have their little guns and do whatever they want with them,” intones State Senator Sandra Cunningham (D-N.J.).

“That’s the line they’ve developed,” finishes State Senator Linda Greenstein (D-N.J.).

It doesn’t matter who said it. Perhaps the strongest indictment of the gun-control agenda comes not from that remark, but from Cunningham’s belittling attitude toward American gun owners who, she scorns, want to “have their little guns and do whatever they want with them.”

Well, actually — yeah. They do want to have their little guns and do whatever they want with them. To deride that conviction is just another way of mocking the 2nd Amendment’s guarantee that the right to bear arms “shall not be infringed.”

Personal Liberty

Ben Bullard

Reconciling the concept of individual sovereignty with conscientious participation in the modern American political process is a continuing preoccupation for staff writer Ben Bullard. A former community newspaper writer, Bullard has closely observed the manner in which well-meaning small-town politicians and policy makers often accept, unthinkingly, their increasingly marginal role in shaping the quality of their own lives, as well as those of the people whom they serve. He argues that American public policy is plagued by inscrutable and corrupt motives on a national scale, a fundamental problem which individuals, families and communities must strive to solve. This, he argues, can be achieved only as Americans rediscover the principal role each citizen plays in enriching the welfare of our Republic.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

  • JeffH

    Scum bags – all of ’em!

  • Harold Olsen

    A few weeks ago, some morons came to my door demanding that I turn in my guns. They said they were part of a program to get people to voluntarily surrender their guns. When I informed them that I did not own any guns, they called me a liar and demanded that I turn my guns over to them immediately. (This is voluntary?) I told them to go to hell and said that if they did not leave me a lone I’d call the cops. They claimed to be working with local police on this program and the mayor’s office and if I did not voluntarily turn over my guns, they’d get them sooner or later. I finally told them that they were lucky I don’t own any guns because I’d give them to them, starting with the bullets if they didn’t leave me alone. I slammed my door on them and then called the police and asked them about it. They claimed to know nothing about such a program. So, I guess these guys were either some group working on their own to take guns off the street or a bunch of cons trying to get people to give them their guns to keep for their own use. I’m thinking the latter. I wonder how many people got conned by these idiots.

    • James A Fagervik

      Did the police come to your home to press charges? if not they knew, If crooks are trying to get gun from us they would want to stop them, this makes no sence.

  • Dave

    You know… these elitists and their arrogance. I’m just waiting for them to come and take the guns. When it’s time to take this country back, these clowns and the ones like them need to be dragged out to the street and strung up from the nearest light pole. That would be a fitting end for them.

    • Robbie

      Gee, seeing as you’ve got guns why are you stringing people up “from the nearest light pole”? Why wouldn’t you just blow them away with one of your weapons?

  • Don 2

    Gun Control Made The Holocaust Possible – No More Nazi Gun Control Laws in America
    Nazi Gun Control Regulations Against Jews’ Possession of Weapons – Nov. 11, 1938

    • hippybiker

      It wasn’t just the NAZIS, Don. It is estimated that 260 million people were killed by their own governments in the 20th century, after first being disarmed. Or, as the late great Pete Peters opined. “Be a real swinger(dance on air)turn in your guns.” Not!

      • Don 2

        Molon Labe

    • bwtanker

      it was well orchestrated by hitler to disarm the jews so the could take them to be killed,it’s a bit of a stretch but who says that’s not what they are doing here so they can do whatever they want

      • Justsomeguy151

        Its no stretch at all. This govt has done nothing but pass more unnecessary Constitution violating laws in the name of “safety” but that’s not their goal, that’s their excuse. When the dollar crashes and people want a French style revolution, who are they coming for? The criminals responsible: The Federal Reserve, this administration, their accomplices in Congress etc.

      • Don 2

        Death by Government Statistics

  • Don 2

    Senator Loretta Weinberg is from New Jersey. New York has its own useless anti-2nd Amendment Democrat senators, Schumer and Gillibrand.

    • chocopot

      Something is wrong here. I live in New Jersey, and we have two far left-wing dirtbag, elitist, anti-constitution Democrat senators, but they are named Menendez and Lautenberg. This Weinberg person may be a State Senator, but she sure isn’t a federal one.

  • jdn

    Why argue about this stuff on a National level ? It seems very clear that certain states want no guns in private hands and others do . Let each state do what they think is best and leave each other alone .

    • LastNameFirst

      Really? Are you that big of an idiot or do you just not understand? I live in the state of Colorado and we are having so many problems with the Assembly now because it did what it wanted, not what the people wanted. We are in the process of recalling a lot of the members now for what they did in regards to gun-control. We have counties mandating laws contradicting what the state did because they feel unrepresented at the state level. In this day and age, it seems that only at the municipal / county levels can the people truly be represented by their elected.

      • Timothy Thompson

        California progressives have moved to all the outlying states and infected their states with the progressive leftest agenda’s of open gay rights, free to do whatever you want, smoke dope and finally take guns away from law abiding citizens. Colorado is going down the drain just like California is, a real shame.

        • JeffH

          TT, those progressives moved to California back in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s and started ruining that state…now they’ve been moving into states like Colorado, Montana, Oregon and Washington…forcing their pathetic ideology into those states and doing their best to destroy freedom and liberty in those states. They’e more akin to a cancer.

        • vicki

          free to do whatever you want,

          Not exactly. More of a free to do whatever the progressive leftest says you want. Your very next sentence is an example

        • Justsomeguy151

          “Smoke dope”? You mean allowing people to have the freedom to put in their bodies what they want, without govt interfering? ‘its none of your damn business what people choose to use, medicinally or recreationally. Now go chug yr beer and suck down yr cigarettes, hypocrite.

      • Walt

        Will, good for the people of Colorado! Recall is a good option to remove many of these California transplants, who have brought their socialist virus to your state. Unfortunately, the Recall option is currently not available at the Federal level. This is something that needs to be changed for the future good of the nation.

      • Hawk!

        I think you’re on to something there, Will. Too much government insulates the elected from the electorate. It’s the same thing that distance did in the middle 1700s. Keeping government small assures that they will spend their attention (and OUR money) on what’s important and has the side benefit of accountibility.

    • James A Fagervik

      We have the power to pack up and move and that will hit their pockets when they lose our money. There is many gun friendly states and some even have there own state military that Obamanation has no power over.

      • chocopot

        I agree with you except you need to realize that to pack up and move, one must have a job waiting in the new location, or a sugar daddy to pay the bills. It’s a lot easier said than done. I live in NJ where the state legislature is now considering new gun control laws that will make what they passed in Connecticut look like child’s play. I would love to leave NJ, but I am tied down by a job, a house, and a family.

        • Wellarmed

          I agree with your statements chocopot. Easier said than done, but it is still an option that should be given substantial weight even with financial loss considerations. Please do not kid yourself. The lines are being drawn but the stage has already been set without our consent. It does not matter what we the people want. We will be simply dealing with the hand that we have been dealt, and in many ways it is of our own making.

          I personally would not want to be caught in a communist state such as yours with a RINO such as Christy running amok when the SHTF. Christy will sign whatever comes across his desk in violation of his oath and the media will still love him in spite of it (please note that all media broadcasters have made little if any mention of his own weapon ban for those that think Faux news is objective).

          He is chosen by the oligarchy just as Obama and Romney and one can only use conjecture that he has had his “meeting” with the Group behind closed doors if he is in the running?

    • Hawk!

      Why argue? Because we have a Constiturion and Bill of Rights that is the law of this land and it’s called America. The rule of law is of no use if it’s constantly ignored when it’s inconvenient. This whole topic desertves NO attention. The acts of a very few idiots are being blown out of proportion by the media creating a hysteria where anything can happen. Medical misadventures kill FAR more people than guns and so do cars. Yet there is no public outcry about either of those issues.

      For those who want their socialism, big government and high taxes, go to Europe or Korea and enjoy your life. Don’t seek to change the foundations of this once great nation.

    • Don 2

      I agree in that we should not argue about this stuff… any level…..the matter was settled in 1791.

    • vicki

      jdn writes:

      It seems very clear that certain states want no guns in private hands and others do . Let each state do what they think is best and leave each other alone .

      Each state agreed to the contract before joining the Union. That contract includes specifically that the right of The People to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed. If they really didn’t like the deal than they should not have joined the Union.

  • LastNameFirst

    Why is it that the people trying to take our guns all have a Jewish last name? Is this group of Israeli rejects? I have never heard of so many Jewish names clustered under one item outside of Israel other than the Holocaust.

    • Walt

      Many of the folks behind the 1928 German gun laws were also socialist Jews in the infamous Weimar Republic, that led Germany to financial and social ruin, opening the path for the political gains of the National Socialist Party in 1933. Much to their horror, the very restrictive gun laws that these socialist implemented in 1928 against all Germans, were greatly expanded in 1938 by Hitler to exclusively disarm ALL Jews in Germany. How’s that for irony?
      Irony can be instructive, or should be, to our modern time current flock of Jewish politicians. However, arrogance and elitism tends to blind folks like this to the lessons of history and the reality of ideological excess.

    • chocopot

      Mr. Roberts:

      As a conservative, America-loving, Constitution-loving Jew, I must tell you that I am far more disappointed with your observation than you are. You are not being anti-Semitic by stating the obvious, and I can only tell you that I despise as much as, if not more than, you the self-anointed elitists like Schumer, Feinstein, Boxer, Bloomberg, and the others who think that disarming law-abiding Americans and destroying our Constitution so elitists like them can rule us is the proper thing to do. I love this country for so many reasons, not the least is that it was the only place on earth that allowed my grandparents to escape persecution – and likely murder – in Eastern Europe at the beginning of the 20th century. Too many of my coreligionists have lost sight of what freedom is and how quickly it can disappear when left-wing scum like the aforementioned, along with those like Obama, and the Clintons, and Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi, and so many others are allowed to be in positions of power and authority. They are all guilty of treason against this nation and its people and should be punished accordingly. Please be aware, however, that not all Jews in this country are left-wing or support the Left; there are many like me who will stand with those like you if and when the time comes.

    • Hawk!

      Wow, WIll! Take it easy! Ones faith has little or nothing to do with the right to have a gun, especially in THIS country. We have far MORE to fear with the likes of the “do gooders” living in Nirvana than our Jewish friends. Jewish folks have more reason to need to bear arms than any progressive can imagine. When we label people we’re also marginalizing them. That happened to the indigenous peoples of this entire hemisphere and their plight has been documented repeatedly. However, the stereo types created during that time continue to proliferate. So, it’s important know who the enemy is (socialists/statists) and then understand them. Jews don’t fit the bill and trying to make it so is only fueling the division progressives need to ignore the law and complete our subjugation. Go to Isreal & talk about confiscating guns. I think the response might well be overwhelming.

    • Ringgo1

      I didn’t know Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Clinton and Holder were Jewish names. Are you an anti-Semite?

  • monizame

    You amerikans will give up your guns or suffer the consequences…You are holding back the progress Presidente Barack hussein obama has worked so hard to gain…Work hard next election to vote in more progressives to take control of the House….Your help will be needed to get the guns out of the amerikan Terrorists hands…It is only a matter of time that you will see the light and comply….You will be happy to feel safe when there are no guns to worry about… Your government only wants to help you..

    • James A Fagervik

      If you feel so safe without gun, MOVE TO ENGLAND. I have not shot a gun in over 20 years and plan to go to the shooting range to be more comfortable with my new gun. WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO HAVE A GUN TO PROTECT OUR FAMILY, lots of guns never get shot unless you take it out once in a while to the shooting range. Good gun owners never hurt anyone unless a bad person with a gun trys to hurt their family, SHAME ON YOU!

    • JeffH

      A little tongue in cheek sarcasm.

      • Hawk!

        As Harry Truman once said, “The nine most feared words in the english language are, I’m from the government and I’m here to help!”.

        • JeffH

          Scary, scary!

  • Bill

    We need all of the guns we can get to protect ourselves from the thugs created by Obama’s racist and failed economic policies.
    Just remember how the Korean community protected themselves in the LA riots when the police left

    • bwtanker

      yes i remember and have bought more ammo

  • disqus_rEWjgfyzIp

    We are dealing with the children that were left behind in the education
    that we have fallen so far behind on. We are currently seeing history
    repeat its self as it did in the 1930s, disarm the public, censor the
    news media unless it makes them look good, build the internal forces so
    they can round up the masses. Is a matter of time and then we will not
    be able to afford food for our families and right now the government is
    blowing more smoke then some old car with no piston rings left. Wait
    this sound like the beginning of Germany’s regrowth in the 1930s and we
    know where that went.

  • Chuck Lee

    EVERY constitution-loving American must be willing to KILL anybody (and that means ANYBODY) who tries to confiscate our firearms. Period! And when … and if … such an operation should ever start, it needs to be “worked back” to the originators … those who wrote the orders, and those who gave the orders … not just the poor useful idiots who are given the orders to confiscate.

    • vicki

      NOT Kill. Our intention must always be to Stop. Accepting the fact that the perp will probably die.

  • Michael Shreve

    The SUBJUGATION of the citizens of the United Sates CANNOT be completed UNTIL they are disarmed by law or by force. A FREE people are a DANGER to a TYRANNICAL government. An ARMED free people makes TYRANNY impossible.

    • chocopot

      Well said. Thus, that is why they are trying (and succeeding) to disarm us, one step at a time. It is very difficult to run a totalitarian dictatorship with 80-90 million armed and very pissed off people.

  • vicki

    Ben Bullard writes:

    Well, actually — yeah. They do want to have their little guns and do
    whatever they want with them. To deride that conviction is just another
    way of mocking the 2nd Amendment’s guarantee that the right to bear arms “shall not be infringed.”

    The “progressives” want nothing more than to confuse the possession(keep) and carrying(bear) of arms with the mis-use of arms. We need to refocus the point that keeping and carrying shall NOT be infringed and there are plenty of laws already covering mis-use of ANY tool, not just tools that are good for defense.

  • TNS

    “They want to keep the guns out of the hands of the bad guys, but they don’t have any regulations to do it,” There is a reason for this. It is already illegal for criminals to own guns. It doesn’t take more legislation to get the criminals guns it takes more and better police work to catch the criminals.

  • LadyFloridaCracker
  • steve buckner

    There are some women that don’t know the first thing about a gun but, there are exceptions. Girls that grew up aroundfarms , ranchesand guns and hunting know about them but, you get some that have never had or owned a gun and would probaly look down the barrel to see if it was loaded. Those are the ones that need an education about the care and handling of weapons. Most women from what I call back east ladies and I use that term loosley would rather call a cop if someone were trying to break into their house but, the women that I know out here in the west would grab their gun and shoot the intruder then call the cops. It’s a matter of perspective. Senators of the state of NJ don’t have many places that they can go and fire a weapon, unless you go out of town to a bay or an ocean, then they might have a place to shoot but, then the only thing there to shoot would be to shoot themselves in the foot. No wonder they want to get rid of other’s weapons, it’s because they the Senators are stupid !!

  • Robbie

    Police in the Boston area are now admitting that in order to take down the two bombers approx 300 shots were fired by police. The interesting thing about this is that virtually all of the bullets missed their mark and many missed by a long shot so to say. Bullet holes have been found in houses all up and down the street where the firefight took place and they are police bullets. I’d say this is cause to ponder the efficacy of the “good man with a gun” hypothesis. Police are trained professionals and if most of their bullets go wild how dangerous does that make arming kindergarden teachers with weapons in a crowded lunch room?

  • Peter Barney

    ‘Is this a joke” this must be,” confiscate! Must got little brains in NJ these Dem. Dim wad State Senators.