All Versions of Gun Bill Go Down in Flames
The Toomey / Manchin bill, Feinsteins Assault Weapons Ban, co-sponsored bills calling for high capacity magazine bans and the concealed carry reciprocity bill ....
All DOA on their respective Senate votes.
Gallup released a poll just this morning that only 4% of the public thinks gun control is a pressing problem. I think these votes prove that much.
Re: All Versions of Gun Bill Go Down in Flames
id like to see how they came to that, 4% seems low, although id agree its not the biggest issue right now.
Is it true the latest thing they voted down that was about "expanded background checks" also included a ban on AR like semi automatic rifles and larger magazines, or were they all separate voting issues? if they were all in the same, its no wonder it was shot down and rightfully.
If they were all separate i think they missed the point with the background checks which even if you dont believe the 90% figure it would still be a large majority and not 46%. These are people here to represent their constituents. whether its pressing or not, were still asking them to vote for the people they represent. Have to agree with Obama when he said "who are we here to represent?".
This is what most agree with and isnt really changing much at all to my knowledge, except making it national...
Quote:
The measure would have expanded rules that already apply to gun dealers' sales, preventing mentally ill people, convicted felons and people convicted of domestic violence from purchasing weapons.
obviously im one of those that support a more nationalized standard for background checks and enforcing such laws more regularly even for private sales, and id say im not in the minority on that. In that aspect alone i think they werent really asking for too much and more along the lines of their creed, "common sense laws".
Re: All Versions of Gun Bill Go Down in Flames
Does this mean O'Malley's proposed MD State gun laws will be rejected as well?
Unfortunately...probably not, huh?
Re: All Versions of Gun Bill Go Down in Flames
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JAB1985
id like to see how they came to that, 4% seems low, although id agree its not the biggest issue right now
Here you go ....
http://www.gallup.com/poll/161813/fe...-problems.aspx
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JAB1985
Is it true the latest thing they voted down that was about "expanded background checks" also included a ban on AR like semi automatic rifles and larger magazines, or were they all separate voting issues? if they were all in the same, its no wonder it was shot down and rightfully.
No. Each were separate bills. The Toomey /Manchin bill was for expanded federal background checks. The Feinstein Bill called for a ban on so-called "assault weapons" and high capacity magazines. The Cornyn Bill called for reciprocity on concealled carry permits. All failed and none of the votes were close.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JAB1985
if they were all separate i think they missed the point with the background checks which even if you dont believe the 90% figure it would still be a large majority and not 46%. These are people here to represent their constituents. whether its pressing or not, were still asking them to vote for the people they represent. Have to agree with Obama when he said "who are we here to represent?".
I, for one, am glad nobody bought the populism that you've seem to have bought into. "They" don't represent anyone as a whole. Each Seantor represents their particular constituents and if you look at those who voted "No", they come from gun friendly states. Thus, they are doing exactly what they were elected to do -- represent their states interests.
As for the 90% poll, the problem is two fold. For one, the question in that poll that's at issue is:
"Do you favor or oppose a federal law requiring background checks on all potential gun buyers?"
http://www.scribd.com/doc/120711121/...ork-Times-Poll
Problem here is there's already in law in place for this. It's called The Brady Law and yes, a majority of Americans support this. Anyone who goes to a gun shop and buys a gun, they must submit to a background check.
The Toomey / Manchin bill made this requirement federal. I think 2A supporters like myeslf saw this as redundent.
Change the language of the question to "Do you favor or oppose a federal law requiring background checks on all sales, including private sales of guns?" and support drops. A lot. The pollsters knew this when they asked the poll question. That's why they asked the original question, knwing that even the vast majority of NRA memebrs even agree with it. It's classic push polling and it happens all the time.
Second, when you're the President and you decide to cloak yourself and this bill within the familes of Newtown by having them at your side, you better damn well make sure the law actually makes an attempt to stop another Newtown like tragedy. Toomey / Manchin doesn't come close to that. Lanza got the gun from his Mother, who made a legal purchase. Sadly, she made the fatal choice to give her unstable son access to her firearms. The bill should have been about mental health and access to firearms to those who suffer from his typ of mental health issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JAB1985
iand id say im not in the minority on that. In that aspect alone i think they werent really asking for too much and more along the lines of their creed, "common sense laws".
The past 15 years of gun laws suggest you are indeed in the minority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
wickedsolo
Does this mean O'Malley's proposed MD State gun laws will be rejected as well?
Unfortunately...probably not, huh?
MD is uneffected. Bu the NRA has already announced it's going after the MD laws via the courts.
Re: All Versions of Gun Bill Go Down in Flames
Well good. I hope the NRA gets Martin O'Taxey to back off.
BTW - I can't tell you how hard it is to bite my tongue with a lot of folks I know because of how incredibly pissed off they are that the Senate didn't pass this bill. I mean, they're - in some cases - on the verge of being violently angry. A lot of them are saying shit like "I guess dead kids in Newtown don't matter to the government..." yadda yadda yadda.
I wonder if those folks even know how difficult it actually is to purchase guns in Connecticut? And all of the laws they want to see passed are actually already enforced in Connecticut...and some.
Re: All Versions of Gun Bill Go Down in Flames
WH calls it shameful day in DC.
Turns out DEMs bit off more than they could chew. They couldn't even get it thru their controlled Senate losing 56-46, so WH blames GOPs for caving in to the gun lobby.
Fact is, they got their way with heath care because the country wants to be a nanny state
but it also wants its guns too.
Can't win em all Prez but it sure would be nice if you got this pissed when Americans are
killed. You didn't even use the word terrorist in your speech the other day while your
investigators did.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/articl...480?slideout=1
Re: All Versions of Gun Bill Go Down in Flames
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonRaven
No. Each were separate bills. The Toomey /Manchin bill was for expanded federal background checks. The Feinstein Bill called for a ban on so-called "assault weapons" and high capacity magazines. The Cornyn Bill called for reciprocity on concealled carry permits. All failed and none of the votes were close.
I wouldnt say 4 votes wasnt close. Id say the others were rightfully shot down though. i think theres a debate for 10+ mags, but honestly as ive said from the beginning, as long as the right people are getting these things, i could not care less what they have.
Quote:
I, for one, am glad nobody bought the populism that you've seem to have bought into. "They" don't represent anyone as a whole. Each Seantor represents their particular constituents and if you look at those who voted "No", they come from gun friendly states. Thus, they are doing exactly what they were elected to do -- represent their states interests.
its odd to me that popular vote doesnt determine what a states thoughts are. like i said, im not in belief that its 90% support expanded, but its going to be a lot more than 50% any way you slice by that large of support, even in a small sample. so saying a state is gun friendly or not, has nothing to do with background checks and popular opinion on this subject, imo. You can be pro-gun, and still believe in background checks, which youre saying most NRA members would support. but your problem is....
Quote:
As for the 90% poll, the problem is two fold. For one, the question in that poll that's at issue is:
"Do you favor or oppose a federal law requiring background checks on all potential gun buyers?"
http://www.scribd.com/doc/120711121/...ork-Times-Poll
Problem here is there's already in law in place for this. It's called The Brady Law and yes, a majority of Americans support this. Anyone who goes to a gun shop and buys a gun, they must submit to a background check.
The Toomey / Manchin bill made this requirement federal. I think 2A supporters like myeslf saw this as redundent.
Change the language of the question to "Do you favor or oppose a federal law requiring background checks on all sales, including private sales of guns?" and support drops. A lot. The pollsters knew this when they asked the poll question. That's why they asked the original question, knwing that even the vast majority of NRA memebrs even agree with it. It's classic push polling and it happens all the time.
redundancy.
The link you posted the question was "do you support background checks on ALL potential gun sales." ALL being the key word. if people took that to mean non-private i dont understand why, and although it may drop, i doubt its below 50% that wouldnt include private in the original question. I do not understand how even the majority of NRA members agree with background checks but on private sales that changes. that makes little to no sense to me. understanding the importance of such for one and not the other, especially when the bill included exceptions for family "gifts", which would be one of the only reasons i can think of for a differing thought between the two. Redundancy is one thing, but "expanded" is another.
Greater enforcing of the laws we have without a doubt would help, but i dont think making them national and expanding them to ALL gun sales wouldnt be even greater.
Quote:
Second, when you're the President and you decide to cloak yourself and this bill within the familes of Newtown by having them at your side, you better damn well make sure the law actually makes an attempt to stop another Newtown like tragedy. Toomey / Manchin doesn't come close to that. Lanza got the gun from his Mother, who made a legal purchase. Sadly, she made the fatal choice to give her unstable son access to her firearms. The bill should have been about mental health and access to firearms to those who suffer from his typ of mental health issues.
Theres certainly some things that probably could have been added. Im not going to say i agree with using the newtown parents, but i dont think their support of the bill/s was fraudulent. Im sure they really believe that they would have helped stop what happened, even if others disagree. again this bill may not support this, but holding gun owners more responsible for their guns is something id support. not sure if youre saying you support such or just throwing out an option you feel would address the issue.
Quote:
The past 15 years of gun laws suggest you are indeed in the minority.
lets not use political outcomes to determine popular opinion. I think we both know theres way more to it than that unfortunately.
Re: All Versions of Gun Bill Go Down in Flames
Man has been killing since Caiin used a rock to kill Able.
He'll always find something to do his dirty deed.
Re: All Versions of Gun Bill Go Down in Flames
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sirdowski
When I heard the president mention his piece about Newtown, I reflexively blurted out, "what an asshole."
It was weak. Very, very, weak.
Not to mention small minded.
:word
Re: All Versions of Gun Bill Go Down in Flames
BTW - I don't think there is a debate to be had about magazine capacity. As you can see (or hear) here you need more than 10 shots.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cqo1Ad6spkY