• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks...[W: 349]

Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

I believe many people in the US saw this bill as a step in the right direction and a compromise, from what I read no one was saying it was going to stop mass shootings but it would of got the ball moving in some peoples eyes. The fact that this bill was shot down just confirms to me that the right are unwilling to even to meet the left anywhere near the middle and nothing will ever change in the US. Its sad for people like my wife's family who's opinion and views get ignored under the weight of the NRA and their millions of dollars.
yeah that direction being severe bans

that is another reason why I opposed this turd of a bill
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

I was just wondering, has there been any project/issue that VP Biden has been put in charge of over the past 4 plus years that has actually been successful?

He has been a strong protector of Obama. think about it-who in god's name would want Biden as President
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Easy...Big Money and the NRA is very good at slimeballing people in elections. A lot of the red state politicians are deathly afraid of the NRA even when their constituents support reasonable restrictions.

So what you are saying is that the democrat leaning voters in their districts are more likely to be swayed by the tactics of the NRA? I would not believe given our media coverage, that they would get away with that. You would think that the more educated progressive voters would see right through it.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

some recent murder stats....Keep spinning it mate.

In the US – population 311.5 million (1) – there were an estimated 13,756 murders in 2009 (2), a rate of about 5.0 per 100,000 (3). Of these 9,203 were carried out with a firearm.

In the UK – population 56.1 million (4) – there were an estimated 550 murders in 2011-12 (5), a rate of about 1.4 per 100,000. Of these 39 were carried out with a firearm


p.s our violent crime rate is measured very differently to Americas.

Ok, fair point on how it is measured. I will take that into account here in this post.

You have less guns so obviously your gun murder rate would lower. I was talking about violent crime. You know, those things guns help prevent. Your violent crime rate if we were to measure it exactly the same as how the FBI measures violent crime is about TWO times higher. If we were to measure them side by side like i did before its about three times. Still, two times higher still shows there is no reason the US wants to be like the UK and disarm its citizens.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

half hour ago:

Never before had President Barack Obama put the moral force and political muscle of his presidency behind an issue quite this big — and lost quite this badly.

Gun control: Obama's Biggest Loss/Politico

you don't want to be heidi heitkamp right now, she's not even up in '14

he's hot, made clear his displeasure, there will be hell

it was baucus, who today called the very obamacare he primarily wrote a "huge train wreck..."

not just a train wreck, mind you...

a HUGE train wreck

yes, it was baucus and pryor and begich from alaska

and yes, the boss is bitchy

he threw what could fairly be described as a tantrum in the rose garden an hour after the vote

they "caved," he cawed

they "couldn't offer [him] any good reasons," he dismissed disdainfully

he's not a very good listener

flanked by poor gabby giffords, a "visibly shaken" joe biden and, of course, the families

they "look for an excuse, any excuse, to say no," he complained

i think it's fair to say that all non apologists could acknowledge what politico calls his "less than johnsonian powers of personal persuasion"

watching him, hearing him, one wonders what he cares more about, all this, or what happened in boston 2 days ago

he's certainly more pissed today

ofa, which can get you an authentic, genuine white house invite for half a mil...

nyt:

Giving or raising $500,000 or more puts donors on a national advisory board for Mr. Obama’s group and the privilege of attending quarterly meetings with the president, along with other meetings at the White House.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/23/u...ress-agenda.html?ref=nicholasconfessore&_r=1&

yes, ofa's fighting back---a national "day of action!"

scary

but who's ofa going after?

mark begich?

this was sposed to be schumer's "sweet spot"

fortunately, no one really cares

Gallup: Only 4% of Americans Think Gun Control is an Important Problem | CNS News

so you got this kinda pissy president running around spending all his time chasing some gun-control windmill only he (and piers morgan) really care about...

and LOSING all the while, to boot

while the entire nation kinda sees itself as, if not dying, at least in some sorta existential crossroads

we got body parts on boylston street

and this horrendous philly abortion murder trial, where necks are snipped, babies are delivered like raining fetuses in toilets stained with blood

with some of the worst anti black racism this country has seen in a long time (the abortionists' original sin)...

the workforce is in the low 60's, personal income is down net, the gdp is microscopic

the gold market is in panic...

are you really surprised?
 
Last edited:
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

I guess the gun haters are now praying for some whack job to shoot up another school. Yeah I do believe that the extremists pray for that sort of stuff. after all, to the extremists, the ENDS justify the means
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

93% of Americans are in favor of background checks. Sad that 46 Senators lack a backbone to stand up to the NRA and the wacko gun lobby.

The 93% don't vote the issue. All the passion is on the other side.:cool:
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

A victory.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

2 hours ago, the tantrum

Defeated and angry — and surrounded by Newtown families and former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) — President Barack Obama blamed a gun lobby that “willfully lied” and senators who “caved to the pressure” for the defeat of his effort to pass gun control through Congress.

Obama blasted the Senate’s voting down the Manchin-Toomey amendment — a bipartisan agreement on background checks that was itself a compromise on a fraction of the comprehensive gun control package the president called for after the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary.

“All in all this was a pretty shameful day for Washington,” Obama said in the Rose Garden, after walking to the podium with his arm around Giffords and hugged the relatives of victims of the December shooting.

Obama: gun defeat 'shameful day for Washington' - Reid J. Epstein - POLITICO.com

this manchin-toomey bill was the lowest hanging of the gun-control fruit, recall

that is, the easiest of the awb-magazines-background checks trilogy

such that, if he can't get a weak kneed background bill in times like these, after all the hype and hoopla...

you know, it's always really all about him

he makes it so

america has never seen a president so selfish

they're starting to regret rebuffing coburn---the backgrounds WITHOUT the registry

rand son of ron took a shot---the president uses these families like props

obama thundered---"props? emotional blackmail? are you serious?"

kinda shrill, no?

leadership, anyone?
 
Last edited:
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

I am a little worried about this. Republicans need to compromise a little, or else it may end like the tax debate. Republicans could have got much larger spending cuts if they didn't reject any tax increases.

Background checks have such a large popularity among the population I am worried they might alienate independents. If they got this through it would shut them down for a while.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Okay...

First I should point out that I am, in general, a centrist. I lean a little left on certain things, and a bit right on certain things, but overall I tend to oppose extremes of either sort.

Now when it comes to gun and self-defense issues, I am a strong defender of the 2A. I don't think it is a right/left issue so much as a freedom issue, and a self-defense issue, and a balance-of-power issue.

While I question whether mandated background checks are really Constitutional, strictly speaking, I accept the current NICS system as a middle-road compromise position since it is relatively non-burdensome to the honest citizen, and possibly does some tiny minescule amount of good (not a lot really, when you look at how very VERY few prosecutions there have been based on people lying on their form and getting caught at it).

As far as preventing crime, I doubt it has much effect, given the current lack of action on attempted violations, and the ready availability of firearms on the black market.

Therefore I have serious doubts that expanding it would have much positive impact. Criminals and the black market would ignore it as they do all laws, and it is not very enforceable.

Therefore, absent a significant positive impact, I see little reason to support same. As I've said I am not dead-set against some sort of expansion of background checks, as long as it is carefully structured and worded to minimize its impact on the law-abiding... but absent more vigorous and effective use of the EXISTING system to nail criminals, I see little point in it.

So, absent any likelihood of substantive positive impact, I see no reason to support increasing restrictions on a fundamental human right that is also enumerated in the Constitution. If you'd have me support such a thing, then I need to see that there is a strong benefit to be gained, and that impact on the law-abiding will be minimal.

Another reason to cheer its failure is that Harry Reid had already talked about trying to slip Feinstein's monsterous AWB back into it later as an amendment... hence my comment about keeping the camel's nose out of the tent in order to avoid ending up with camel droppings on the rug. :mrgreen:

So there ya have it in a nutshell...

If a psychologically unstable person, who would have been blocked by a background check, were allowed to buy a weapon and then harm people with it, would your perspective change?
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

93% of Americans are in favor of background checks. Sad that 46 Senators lack a backbone to stand up to the NRA and the wacko gun lobby.

Is it all the way up to 93% now? :lamo

Do you honestly believe that many senators voted against their constituents the year before elections? You've been drinking the kool-aid Dude.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

don't forget, the awb and the magazines both went down today too

indeed, both crashed (significantly) harder

difi's awb, for example, died, 40 to 60

ie, only 40 democrats would assent to ban the ar15, et al

the 15 d's who departed were---baucus of montana, begich alaska, bennett colorado, udall colorado, udall new mexico, heinrich new mexico, pryor arkansas, donnelly indiana, heitkamp and tim johnson from the dakotas, tester montana, warner virginia, hagan north carolina and manchin

fyi

party on! progressives
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

This is what they get for trying to exploit Newtown to pass a bill that would have had no effect on Newtown.:roll:
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

If a psychologically unstable person, who would have been blocked by a background check, were allowed to buy a weapon and then harm people with it, would your perspective change?

better ten unstable people get guns than one person be improperly denied and then slain. you see, the people most likely to use a gun to commit murder or other intentional crimes are the people least likely to be deterred by gun legislation

gun control tends to restrict GOOD gun owners far more than BAD gun owners

if you had been beaten and raped because you were disarmed would you be more likely to carry a gun next time out?
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

If a psychologically unstable person, who would have been blocked by a background check, were allowed to buy a weapon and then harm people with it, would your perspective change?


It has already happened of course.

I've been an advocate for some while now for adding "has been committed to a mental institute/judged incompetent" to the NICS system.

Of course there's a catch... criminals and crazies don't HAVE to go thru legal dealers or NICS. They can buy off the black market. No matter what laws you pass, the black market will still provide those things people want that are illegal. Just like weed and meth...

So I have grave reservations that expanding background check requirements would actually do any great good in the real world as-it-is, especially given the Fed/ATF's absolutely miserable record on enforcing and prosecuting the EXISTING system of checks (NICS) and those who try to get around it (last I checked, 7 convictions out of 250,000 detected attempts, pitiful).

So yeah, if a proposed gun control law doesn't appear that it would do any ACTUAL good, I'm not likely to support it just because it "looks good".


Bear in mind, when I was 24 my best-friend-like-a-brother was murdered in a robbery at his business... taken off and shot in the head with a .44 magnum. I didn't blame the gun; I blamed the murderer.

And I also blamed myself for not being there, as I often did help him close for the night, since I would have been armed as is my custom...
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

don't forget, the awb and the magazines both went down today too

indeed, both crashed (significantly) harder

difi's awb, for example, died, 40 to 60

ie, only 40 democrats would assent to ban the ar15, et al

the 15 d's who departed were---baucus of montana, begich alaska, bennett colorado, udall colorado, udall new mexico, heinrich new mexico, pryor arkansas, donnelly indiana, heitkamp and tim johnson from the dakotas, tester montana, warner virginia, hagan north carolina and manchin

fyi

party on! progressives


anyone who sought to ban the semi auto version of the standard militia weapon should properly be charged with treason and removed from office and transported to jail.
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

better ten unstable people get guns than one person be improperly denied and then slain. you see, the people most likely to use a gun to commit murder or other intentional crimes are the people least likely to be deterred by gun legislation

gun control tends to restrict GOOD gun owners far more than BAD gun owners

if you had been beaten and raped because you were disarmed would you be more likely to carry a gun next time out?

How would a good person be blocked from getting a gun?
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

I highly doubt it. Single issue elections are rare and 2014 is still a while away.

And this issue will not die.

Are you unaware of the anti-2nd Amendment politicians who lost their jobs in 1994?
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

How would a good person be blocked from getting a gun?

well lets see

how did Ted KENNEDY get on a no fly list (Especially since it did not involve him flying the plane)
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

While I'm not really dead-set against expanding background checks to some degree, on the whole I'm glad this went down in flames.... if you let the camel's nose in the tent, pretty soon the whole camel will be trying to come in.

WOOT!! :mrgreen:

... not sure why you are celebrating. If a mass shooting ever occurs again that could have prevented with expanded background checks, the backlash against pro-gun organizations will result in stronger reforms than would have been a case if they had just agreed to a reasonable reform in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

We the people win. Passing laws to get around the constitution is not the American way. We can claim victory in this battle. But the gun grabbers are not finished. They will continue to attempt to strip the people of their rights and we have to remain vigilant. There is a proper way to approach this if you are anti gun. It is spelled out in Article 5 of the constitution. Amending the Constitution. As long as the antis continue to attempt to usurp the second amendment they will fail. And today they failed in a major way. And we can claim victory.

Article. V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments,
which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article*; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

:2party::2usflag::2party:
 
Last edited:
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

well lets see

how did Ted KENNEDY get on a no fly list (Especially since it did not involve him flying the plane)

Is he still on the no fly list or was he able to clear that up?
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Is he still on the no fly list or was he able to clear that up?

I think when he was removed from the No-die list he also went off the no fly list:mrgreen:
 
Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

no wonder they're losing

On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid read from a prepared statement that “On the anti-gun legislation before the Senate, we are making good progress on the effort to schedule a series of votes on amendments to the anti-gun-violence legislation before the Senate.”

Reid calls new legislation 'the anti-gun legislation' | The Daily Caller

to quote rick perry, "oops"
 
Back
Top Bottom