View Poll Results: What do you guys think of the outcome?

Voters
30. You may not vote on this poll
  • The Constitution will live another day!

    25 83.33%
  • Congress is cowardly!

    3 10.00%
  • Dont give a rats a**

    2 6.67%
  • What assault weapons bill?

    1 3.33%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 65

Thread: "Assault Weapons" Ban shot down in Senate

  1. #11
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,595
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: "Assault Weapons" Ban shot down in Senate

    We need a well organized web site showing EVERY Congressman's vote and why(a hundred words or so)..
    We also need non-lethal means of self-defence.
    The masses, the people, do NOT need WMDs.
    We do need to be protected from the insane, the semi-insane , and the criminals......and the NRA !
    We are soon to have the quality of government to do this....but today ?
    Obviously NOT.

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: "Assault Weapons" Ban shot down in Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    It will make us pay more, as surely the FFL dealers are not going to provide "free" NICS BG checks or forego keeping records of all "private" gun sales. I have problems with the text of the universal BG check portion of the bill.

    This is crearly national registration, one gun transfer at a time. Note that the amount of the fee is left wide open.

    Another bizarre requirement is immediate reporting of a lost or stolen gun to the US Attorney General:
    Which is why many of us would simply ignore the law.

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: "Assault Weapons" Ban shot down in Senate

    The democrats thought they could rush this bill through while people were so upset about the most recent school shooting but once again have failed, thank God.

  4. #14
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: "Assault Weapons" Ban shot down in Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    Far too many guns qualify as "banned" (for new sale) under this bill. The following, Taurus PT638, modest caliber semi-auto pistol is not an "assault weapon":

    Taurus PT 638 Handgun - Gander Mountain

    Attachment 67144738
    This is the inherent danger to allowing government to define its own terms, be out assault weapons or terrorists. They will always abuse it, they will always take it too far; this is innate behavior to government. This is the reason we are to control it, we are to restrict it, and we are to make the definitions. But it takes work to keep the Republic and too many are unwilling to put forth the effort.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  5. #15
    Advisor Lightning's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    07-14-13 @ 12:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    342

    Re: "Assault Weapons" Ban shot down in Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    The democrats thought they could rush this bill through while people were so upset about the most recent school shooting but once again have failed, thank God.
    Again....damn bastards!! OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!
    “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
    -Benjamin Franklin

  6. #16
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,601

    Re: "Assault Weapons" Ban shot down in Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    Which is why many of us would simply ignore the law.
    Which is why this is simply step one in the process. It accomplishes very little but at added cost to all "legal" gun sales, note that the "fee" is for ANY gun transfer from a FFL dealer to a non-FFL dealer. In CA that fee is now $35. The bill makes no mention of any of that fee going to the gov't - simply a bonanza for FFL dealers.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  7. #17
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,938
    Blog Entries
    25

    Re: "Assault Weapons" Ban shot down in Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    That will not happen. If Reid had the votes it would have been included. What will pass is "universal" BG checks, expanded (maximum) sentences for straw purchases and gifts of borrowed money to the states for school security (pork). What will be interesting is that this must be called an "emergency bill" to not require budget offsets under the "pay as you go" rules.
    Reid is more interested in retaining the Senate in 2014 than passing an assault weapons ban. Up for re-election in 2014 that a vote for the assault weapons ban might doom their changes for re-election are red state democrats: Begich AK, Landrieu LA, Baucus MT,Hagan NC, Johnson SD. These 5 wouldn’t be helping their chances of re-election with an AYE vote. Better that Reid never brings up the ban for a vote than take a chance of either these 5 losing in 2014 or voting their constituents wishes by voting against the ban. Then throw in Tester MT and Heitkamp from ND who ran last year on as pro gun, anti gun control, you probably have at least 7 Democratic Nay votes in the Senate. Then there are at least 3 more that their yes vote would be probable. No having 10 Democrats vote against the bill would be an embarrassment, which he could live with. Having those senators up for re-election in 2014 vote for the bill and lose, that Reid can’t live with

    Best strategy for Reid, Do not bring up the assault weapons ban at all.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  8. #18
    Advisor Lightning's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    07-14-13 @ 12:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    342

    Re: "Assault Weapons" Ban shot down in Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    Reid is more interested in retaining the Senate in 2014 than passing an assault weapons ban. Up for re-election in 2014 that a vote for the assault weapons ban might doom their changes for re-election are red state democrats: Begich AK, Landrieu LA, Baucus MT,Hagan NC, Johnson SD. These 5 wouldn’t be helping their chances of re-election with an AYE vote. Better that Reid never brings up the ban for a vote than take a chance of either these 5 losing in 2014 or voting their constituents wishes by voting against the ban. Then throw in Tester MT and Heitkamp from ND who ran last year on as pro gun, anti gun control, you probably have at least 7 Democratic Nay votes in the Senate. Then there are at least 3 more that their yes vote would be probable. No having 10 Democrats vote against the bill would be an embarrassment, which he could live with. Having those senators up for re-election in 2014 vote for the bill and lose, that Reid can’t live with

    Best strategy for Reid, Do not bring up the assault weapons ban at all.
    Of course, he's a politician who is thinking about his own skin. Wish Dianne Feinstien would stak example though. But you got to give it to her though, despite the political suicide and hatred she will incur, she stuck with what she thought was "right".
    “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
    -Benjamin Franklin

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: "Assault Weapons" Ban shot down in Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    The democrats thought they could rush this bill through while people were so upset about the most recent school shooting but once again have failed, thank God.
    That's immediately what I thought. I believe that they sensed their time to "strike while the iron was hot" was rapidly running down, so they fumbled through with a bunch of grossly overreaching bullet points (no pun intended) with the idea that it'd be a blue party rubber-stamp.

    I'm both shocked and thrilled that it was defeated.

  10. #20
    Sage
    polgara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,351

    Re: "Assault Weapons" Ban shot down in Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by bubbabgone View Post
    I've noted before that this section ‘‘APPENDIX A—FIREARMS EXEMPTED BY THE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN OF 2013" is especially problematic for at least a couple of reasons.

    1. Rather than restricting certain weapons it lists what's allowed. Nothing new would be allowed to be developed and no manufacturer would try.
    2. When working with an established list of what's allowed, lawmakers would be able to whittle away at it more easily rather than trying to define what they're against & why.


    Remember the Cruz / Feinsten confrontation the other day?
    Cruz was drawing a parallel between the 1st and 2nd amendment and limitations on each.
    He wasn't suggesting there couldn't be some reasonable restrictions on each.
    But here's the thing ... can you imagine if Feinstein or anyone else came up with a law restricting speech to what's on a list they developed and anything else would be in violation?

    It would never pass SC muster.
    Good morning, Bubba.

    1. Very sneaky loophole those attorneys have come up with. I wonder if the public is aware of this?

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •