Democrats says the darnedest things


Congresswoman Diana DeGette (D-CO)

The media loves to point out the stupid things that Republicans say … and, being politicians, they do say their share of stupid things.

But if you depend on the mainstream media for your news, then you might think that Democrats are all genius-level intellects whose every word is cherished wisdom designed to send thrills down Chris Matthew’s leg.

But let me assure you that nothing could be further from the truth.  And this is particularly true when Democrats attempt to talk credibly about the firearms that they want so desperately to ban and the constitutional right to keep and bear arms that they wish to destroy.

I thought it would be illustrative to share a few of the more frighteningly egregious comments that Democrats have made.

Let’s start with Colorado Congresswoman Diana DeGette.  She joined New York Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy in introducing a bill to ban the manufacture of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds for sale to civilians.  In other words, she appears to be just another anti-gun bigot … right?  Maybe not.  Maybe she doesn’t even understand the fundamentals of what she is talking about.

Yesterday, Congresswoman DeGette participated in a Denver Post public forum in which she discussed her proposal.  When asked whether such a ban would be effective since there are tens of millions of such magazines already in circulation, she made the following statement.

“What’s the efficacy of banning these magazine clips? I will tell you, these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now, they’re going to shoot them … the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will be shot and there won’t be any more available.”

Yes … that’s right …  a US Congresswoman who feels she is qualified to restrict the rights of American gun owners is ignorant enough to believe that magazines are single-use items.

Don’t believe me?  Watch the video yourself.  The level of ignorance displayed by Congresswoman DeGette is staggering.


But Congresswoman DeGette does not stand alone on the plains of ignorance.  There are others there with her.  After all, no parade of the stupid would be complete without an appearance by good ole’ ‘Average Joe’ Biden.

In fact, I have written before about ole’ Joe’s monumentally stupid advice regarding firearms use and home defense tactics.  But I feel that the truest example of what we are facing occurred back at the end of February, when ole’ Joe was stumping for the administration’s newly declared war on guns in Connecticut.

Dismissing tens of millions of vocal gun owners in a single sentence, ole’ Joe made the absurd statement that “No law-abiding citizen in the United States of America has any fear that their constitutional rights will be infringed in any way. None. Zero.”

Wait … what?  There are lots of law-abiding citizens who fear that their constitutional rights will be infringed.  Gun owners fear the Democrat’s war on guns, same-sex couples fear DOMA, minority citizens of New York fear the stop and frisk antics of Mayor Bloomberg and his minions.

I could go on and on but you see my point.  In fact, a lot of law-abiding citizens fear that their constitutional rights will be infringed because they are infringed … on a daily basis.

But in Joe’s world … a world of privilege and power I might note … such people do not even warrant recognition.  In his worldview, we are less than wrong … we don’t even exist.

Once again, I suspect that many of you reading this will doubt the accuracy of my words. And once again, I will direct you to the video.

I know that we are only a few days beyond April Fools Day so let me make this perfectly clear.  These comments were actually made.  Even worse, they were made by people who are supposedly intelligent enough to make public policy for our nation.

And people wonder why gun owners fear the intentions of Democrats …

About John Pierce

Monachus Lex is written by Virginia attorney John Pierce. John is a life-long gun rights advocate, an NRA certified instructor and co-founder of the nationwide gun rights group

He has an undergraduate degree in Computer Information Systems, an MBA from George Mason University and is a 2012 Honors Graduate of Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul, MN.

Professionally, John is a member of the American Bar Association Second Amendment Civil Rights Litigation Subcommittee and his writings have been published by the ABA Civil Rights Litigation Committee and the ABA Minority Trial Lawyer Committee.

In addition, his open carry advocacy has been featured on Nightline and The Daily Show With Jon Stewart.
This entry was posted in 'Assault Weapons', Colorado, Democrats, General Civil Rights, High Capacity Magazines, Vice President Biden, Vice Presidents. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Democrats says the darnedest things

  1. swampsniper says:

    That is INDUSTRIAL GRADE ignorance! Why does she believe she is qualified to even suggest legislation on something she knows nothing about?

    • Legion7 says:

      Remember that a majority voted her in…

      • CL says:

        She was elected by electors that did what some lettered group told them-VOTE FOR HER-

        Lettered groups for example-NAACP. MEA, UAW, AARP. Add your own. These groups also send lots of money to get these kind of legislators elected.

        Others include McCain, Obama, Pelosi, Schumer, my 2 Sens-Levin and Stabenow– on and on and on….

  2. Grapeshot says:

    Magazines are like Pez candy are they not? Once the container is empty you just throw it away and buy a new full one right?

    I quit buying new magazines – was being cheated – they were all empty, therefore useless. From now on I’ll only buy previously owned, loaded magazines. Anybody know where I can buy some mags loaded with Gold Dot, any caliber .45 or less that will fit down the barrel of my pistol. Contact me at [email protected]

    • P C R says:

      Please tell me this guy is joking, nobody can be that ignorant, if you own a gun and don’t know that magazines are reloadable, please sell your gun to the local pawn shop or send it to me, you have now business owning one, and as for your comment of any caliber .45 or less your ever more ignorant than is humanly possible You c can’t just put any round in a gun and Hope it will fire ,Please , please tell me are just goofing on DeGettes stupidity, if not get yourself a pretty blue helmet with a yellow propeller on top and check into the closest mental institution because you are seriously brain damaged, then there is Alan roses comment that makes them sound even more ignorant “Clips and magazines are the same thing ” it’s just that military/Law enforcement use the word Magazine and Civilians use the word clip in most cases or pistols use clips and rifles use magazines, there is no difference they are all spring loaded container that deliver one round of ammunition into the chamber after the bolt cycles which means her spokes person is as ignorant as she is, and Dave , come one, retards/down’s syndrome/special people are smarter than this guy, I’ll bet you give a down’s Syndrome person an empty magazine and a pile of bullets he/she would figure it out in no time

      • Brewsky says:

        Perhaps he’s got one of every caliber from .45 on down? God I wish I had the money to own a gun of every caliber from .45 on down.

      • CplDevilDog says:

        Uhh…Take a chill pill dude, he was being sarcastic.
        As far as the “Clips vs. Magazines” debate, your statement is also false. A spring-loaded container for rounds that promoted automatic or semi-automatic fire without the need to load individual rounds into the chamber, whether they be detachable or not, pistol or rifle, is called a magazine. A “clip” is what the individual rounds themselves come attached to, and usually only rifle-calibres like .308 and .223. You take the rounds off of the “clip” and load them into the “magazine.” For instance, the US military’s M1 Garand used an 8-round “clip” to load ammunition into the weapon’s magazine for firing. Today, ammunition for the military’s M4 and M16-series rifles comes on 10-round “stripper clips” that are fed either individually or by speed-loader into the magazine. It has nothing to do with what type of weapon you’re using. The terms “clip” and “magazine” describe different items completely. They have become fairly interchangeable though, because most folks either don’t know the difference or see both as a way to hold a group of ammo rather than individual rounds.

      • Bluesheepdog_WA says:

        Obviously dry wit and sarcasm are completely lost on you…

  3. Alan Rose says:

    1. Her spolesperson came back afteward and said she meant ‘clips’ not magazines. Oops still stupid.
    2. Uncle Joe would think our rights remain intact as long as we are allowed one flinklock and five balls.

    • P C R says:

      I have three muzzle loaders a .50 long rifle a .50 pistol and a navy army .40 six shooter and they do more damage than most of my so called assault rifles so it seems Mr. Joe Biden forgot how we won the revolutionary war, a thousand men with 5 bullets is more that 1 man with a 30 round magazine, it only takes 1 bullet to kill 1 person and only 1 person to pull the trigger, The second amendment is there so We The people can defend ourselves against tyranny of the government and over through it, that is why democrats want it abolished, They are not promoting gun control to stop crime they are afraid that We The People will rise up and revolt against them, We had a civil war over the rights of one race that cost many lives, can you imagine how bloody a civil war will be when it’s the rights of all of the countries citizens on the line

      • CplDevilDog says:

        While I agree with you in general, I think your argument could use a little polish. The comparison isn’t one man with an AR and 30-round magazine to a thousand men with single-shot muzzle-loaders. That would be obvious. But one man with a 30-round AR against one man with a single-shot Kentucky Rifle is also fairly obvious. Or on the larger scale, a thousand men with Kentucky Rifles against a thousand with ARs. The margin gets even wider I think. As I said, I agree with your intent, but your statement itself is flawed.

      • CplDevilDog says:

        And the civil war wasn’t initially about slavery, it was about states’ rights. Slavery was (as sad as it is to say) a politically handy add-on to gain popularity for the government’s willingness to go to war with our own people. The fact that it was initially about the individual state’s right to govern itself within the parameters of the larger Federal Government, and government at the national level being kept small and marginally guiding the states and binding them to a single unified country is what kind of scares me today; it seems the powers-that-be have forgotten this, that We the People are not only capable of deciding things from how we discipline our children to firearms ownership for ourselves, without Federal intervention, we actually desire to do so. If things don’t change quickly and completely, I can definitely see Civil War II around the corner, for exactly the same reasons as the first bout. (For the moderator, feel free to pin this post to the end of my first.)

        • Rich says:

          You are sadly mistaken about the civil war not being about slavery. Let me quote to you a few lines from the Texas Ordinance of Succession adopted on Feb 1st 1861:

          “… these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of the equality of all men, irrespective of race or color–a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of the Divine Law.”


          “We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.”


          “… that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations …”

          If Texas isn’t enough, how about some choice quotes from the Mississippi Declaration of Succession:

          “Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery – the greatest material interest of the world. ”

          I agree with you on gun control – it’s a bad thing, but please please stop with the insane babble that the civil war wasn’t really about slavery – it’s that type of vacuous argument that makes everyone think that southerners are historically ignorant or revisionists. The civil war was only about ‘states rights’ in so much as those states wanted the ‘right’ to keep slaves.

  4. CplDevilDog says:

    I would put Congresswoman DeGette’s comments right up there with the “incendiary bullets are heat-seeking” comment I saw recently on YouTube, or the confusion about what a “ barrel shroud ” is. These are the people we (as in the majority, which is possibly even worse!) chose to make our laws, and quite frankly it’s terrifying! They don’t know what they’re trying to legislate, so what makes us think they know how to legislate it?!? They respond to someone else telling them what they should be scared of, and instead of questioning WHY they should be scared, they go out and tell other people to be scared of it too, even though they themselves can’t even say what “it” is. This has got to stop, or we’re doomed as a country.

  5. David says:

    How many .22 shorts can a leaver action Henry rifle? How many .22 longs will the same rifle hold? The answer: More than 10 rounds in either instance. Will a .22 kill someone? Answer: Yes it will. Admittedly, they have to be a little closer than with an AR-15 or a .308 or my favorite. An old Enfield .303 which with the proper load will reach out to at least 500 yards if not further if you know how to shoot and understand all that goes into making long distance shots. And that is just with steel sights. In short, our legislators are totally clueless. But someone voted for them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *