• 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!

"Assault Weapons" Ban shot down in Senate

What do you guys think of the outcome?

  • The Constitution will live another day!

    Votes: 22 81.5%

  • Congress is cowardly!

    Votes: 3 11.1%

  • Dont give a rats a**

    Votes: 2 7.4%

  • What assault weapons bill?

    Votes: 1 3.7%
  • Total voters
    27
Gipper said:
Careful. The last conspiracy theorist who said something similar to what you said? We neeeeeeeeeever heard from him again.

Quick. Destroy all recording devices.
Click to expand...
Heh. Spoken like a true conspiracy theorist. I, of course, am not a conspiracy theorist, which proves that I likely am one. What recording devices? It's a toaster.
 
Lightning said:
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".
Click to expand...

I agree, although being from California I would imagine the majority of Californians are for the ban.
 
Perotista said:
Reid is more interested in retaining the Senate in 2014 than passing an assault weapons ban.
Click to expand...

That would have been my first thought as well had Reid not been re-elected in 2010 and not due for re-election until 2016. And is my belief plans not to rerun then.

What Reid did was almost a foregone conclusion in as his intent was/is to protect the Dem caucus. One third of the Senate are up for re-election in 2014 and many of those are Dems. The whole Bill would have been doomed for failure with Feinstein’s AWB incorporated. By removing from the main Bill structure and offering as an amendment allows the Dems an opportunity to vote ‘yes’ for the rest of the mess that looks much more benign by comparison. Enabling the Dems to then vote against the AWB amendment with the hopes of preserving their seat in 2014 and retaining majority.
 
Redbeard said:
That would have been my first thought as well had Reid not been re-elected in 2010 and not due for re-election until 2016. And is my belief plans not to rerun then.

What Reid did was almost a foregone conclusion in as his intent was/is to protect the Dem caucus. One third of the Senate are up for re-election in 2014 and many of those are Dems. The whole Bill would have been doomed for failure with Feinstein’s AWB incorporated. By removing from the main Bill structure and offering as an amendment allows the Dems an opportunity to vote ‘yes’ for the rest of the mess that looks much more benign by comparison. Enabling the Dems to then vote against the AWB amendment with the hopes of preserving their seat in 2014 and retaining majority.
Click to expand...

Reid learned a lot from the 2010 election when he forced every Democrat in the Senate to vote for Obamacare regardless of that their state or constituents wishes were. He lost 6 senate seats and by the grace of god, or the GOP in nominating two idiotic candidates in Angle and O'Donnell that turn two wins into loses or the GOP could have picked up 8 seats. One of them being Reid's.
 
Perotista said:
I agree, although being from California I would imagine the majority of Californians are for the ban.
Click to expand...

I meant more with the country at large and others in the political scene, such as donors, congresspersons, etc.
 
Lightning said:
I meant more with the country at large and others in the political scene, such as donors, congresspersons, etc.
Click to expand...

I suppose my answer there showed some of the cynicism in me. I wonder how many senators or congressmen for that mater would vote their convictions if they knew they would be defeated in the next election because of it? Personally, I do not think many. But again, I am nothing but an old cynic.
 
I don't know that there will necessarily be a connection, but I believe there will be some who look at the murder of the head of the Colorado Prison system yesterday and the horror on the face of the Governor of Colorado as a bit of a warning not to be too cavalier in their approach to gun control and infringements on real or perceived 2nd amendment rights.

You also have Governor Cuomo in New York indicating that their newly adopted gun control laws, barely a couple of months old, are being revised at this time.
 
There doesn't appear to be an check box for;


EXCELLENT it is about time congress did something right.
 
The awb was a long shot anyway. But the democrats line in the sand should be on background checks. If that does not pass then I guess this headline will prove true

image.jpg
 
Wiggen said:
Who could possibly be surprised by this? I posted the day after the massacre of the infants in Connecticut that nothing would be done legislatively, because the NRA sets gun policy in this country, and the NRA has been taken over by survivalists and the black helicopter crowd.

Nothing to see here. Just move along
Click to expand...
.
Click to expand...

I take it you're not referring to your comment.
 
I never understood the inclusiong of both an assault weapons ban and a magazine size restriction. It always seemed redundant to me. An AR-15 with a 10 or 15 round clip is not an assault weapon by any definition I can think of.

If I had to choose one or the other, I would gladly give up the assault weapons ban, since there won't be assault weapons sold considering the magazie size would preclude any weapons from being assault weapons.
 
polgara said:
Good morning, Bubba.

1. Very sneaky loophole those attorneys have come up with. I wonder if the public is aware of this?
Click to expand...
Morning, Pol.
Still getting flurries here.
Anything there?
 
bubbabgone said:
Morning, Pol.
Still getting flurries here.
Anything there?
Click to expand...

Flurries at the moment, but we are predicted to get four to six inches of snow. Cleveland, which is about 40 miles from us, was told to expect a foot of snow, but they are closer to Lake Erie than we are, and I don't know if it's occuring yet, or if it's on the way....sigh...
 
jamesrage said:
Great.Hopefully it states down. Obama still has four more years and anti-2nd amendment scum will continue to get elected to office.So we have to remain vigilant against these anti-2nd amendment scum.
Click to expand...

If not ...we will resort to post #6 of this thread.
 
I wish that this bill passed. But it didnt. But oh well.
 
Lightning said:
Care to defend your position?
Click to expand...

I believe assault weapons should be banned because i dont believe civilians have no need for them and should only be used for the armed forces members. Its simple as that.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
I believe assault weapons should be banned because i dont believe civilians have no need for them and should only be used for the armed forces members. Its simple as that.
Click to expand...

I honestly believe that as well.... the problem is over half of the firearms named on the bill were not assault weapons. They were just thrown in there for good measure. Is that just ok? And how is my property, my neighbors property and everyone else's property any of your concern?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Safety of the community. Safety of the nation.
Click to expand...

Than why not ban machetes? Or pocket/kitchen knives?

Why not ban fast food or big sodas (oh wait... they tried that in NYC :doh)? Automobiles and Alcohol are really big killers. Those things are a threat to the safety of the people.

And why must the left insist on protecting people from themselves?

And why does the left believe that banning firearms will make unarmed, law-abiding citizens safer from armed criminals who happen to be criminals because they follow and respect no law?
 
Lightning said:
Than why not ban machetes? Or pocket/kitchen knives?

Why not ban fast food or big sodas (oh wait... they tried that in NYC :doh)? Automobiles and Alcohol are really big killers. Those things are a threat to the safety of the people.

And why must the left insist on protecting people from themselves?
Click to expand...
Tell me what is the point of a civilian owning an assault rifle? Assault weapons should be banned because they serve no purpose but killing many people in little time without having to worry about reloading. No one needs an assault weapon to protect their house.

I am 100% in favor of gun ownership. I believe that every American citizen has the right to own a gun or guns, and to use weapons to protect themselves if that arises. Saying that however, I do not believe that a citizen should have the right to own military grade assault weapons.

And why does the left believe that banning firearms will make unarmed, law-abiding citizens safer from armed criminals who happen to be criminals because they follow and respect no law?
Click to expand...
6qz28z.jpg
 
earthworm said:
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.
Click to expand...

only someone who is both hysterical and completely ignorant about weapons would call common police self defense weapons "WMDS".

your rants about the NRA are just pathetic

why is it that the biggest haters of average people being armed are those who push an ever-expanding malignant government
 
Wiggen said:
Who could possibly be surprised by this? I posted the day after the massacre of the infants in Connecticut that nothing would be done legislatively, because the NRA sets gun policy in this country, and the NRA has been taken over by survivalists and the black helicopter crowd.

Nothing to see here. Just move along.
Click to expand...

its a stupid law that has no relevance to public safety. rather its an orgasm of anti gun culture hatred. Gun haters cannot fathom why anyone would own a gun and dismiss any reason for ownership.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom